A BIONIC EYEBLINK: MANAGEMENT OF FACIAL PALSY

This thesis highlights the current gold-standard surgical procedures for the rehabilitation of mimicry in individuals with facial paralysis and explores the potential application of functional electrical stimulation (FES) as a novel treatment restoring the face mimicry. Closed-loop facial pacing represents an innovative solution for prosthetically assisted movements. In particular, blinking is typically symmetrical, enabling healthy eye blink on one side of the face to serve as a trigger to pace assisted blinks on the contralateral side, in case of unilateral peripheral facial palsy. The goals of this research are developing an eyeblink detection system and advancing the understanding of performing surface FES of the facial nerve in order to elicit artificial eyeblinks. The application of a biomimetic device to individuals with acute reversible facial palsy would provide immediate restoration of the periocular function and could be used until either the patient recovers sufficient function to no longer require assistance for eye closure, or the decision is made to proceed with further surgery

Electrical stimulation of facial muscles : user experience of two facial muscle stimulation devices

A human face is essential for one’s appearance, key senses and vital functions. In addition, facial expressions are an effective way to communicate non-verbally. Unilateral facial paresis disables facial muscles on one side causing several problems for facial functions and non-verbal communication. One way to treat facial paresis is electrical stimulation of facial muscles which is a largely examined method. However, different aspects of user experience of facial stimulation have not been systematically investigated. This study examined experience of electrical facial stimulation as well as experience of using two commercial stimulation devices. According to several studies, people judge stimuli and organize experiences through three key dimensions: pleasure, arousal and dominance. These dimensions together with acceptance and naturalness were used to evaluate the user experience of electrical stimulation. The user experience of the stimulation devices was evaluated by a modified AttrakDiff model. The research data was collected by testing two facial stimulation devices with 14 healthy participants. The participants stimulated two facial muscles, frontalis (forehead) and zygomaticus major (cheek) with both stimulators. The user experience was evaluated by two questionnaires, one focusing on the stimulation as such and one for the devices. The participants were also interviewed shortly before and after testing. According to the results, both devices’ stimulations were accepted quite well. Stimulation of forehead was rated as somewhat more natural than cheek, whereas stimulation of cheek was rated more arousing than forehead with both devices. Neither was stimulation of forehead nor cheek rated more pleasant or dominant. Ten participants out of fourteen preferred the smaller and lighter stimulation device which contains a separate control panel and an electrode

Electrical stimulation of facial muscles : user experience of two facial muscle stimulation devices

A human face is essential for one’s appearance, key senses and vital functions. In addition, facial expressions are an effective way to communicate non-verbally. Unilateral facial paresis disables facial muscles on one side causing several problems for facial functions and non-verbal communication. One way to treat facial paresis is electrical stimulation of facial muscles which is a largely examined method. However, different aspects of user experience of facial stimulation have not been systematically investigated. This study examined experience of electrical facial stimulation as well as experience of using two commercial stimulation devices. According to several studies, people judge stimuli and organize experiences through three key dimensions: pleasure, arousal and dominance. These dimensions together with acceptance and naturalness were used to evaluate the user experience of electrical stimulation. The user experience of the stimulation devices was evaluated by a modified AttrakDiff model. The research data was collected by testing two facial stimulation devices with 14 healthy participants. The participants stimulated two facial muscles, frontalis (forehead) and zygomaticus major (cheek) with both stimulators. The user experience was evaluated by two questionnaires, one focusing on the stimulation as such and one for the devices. The participants were also interviewed shortly before and after testing. According to the results, both devices’ stimulations were accepted quite well. Stimulation of forehead was rated as somewhat more natural than cheek, whereas stimulation of cheek was rated more arousing than forehead with both devices. Neither was stimulation of forehead nor cheek rated more pleasant or dominant. Ten participants out of fourteen preferred the smaller and lighter stimulation device which contains a separate control panel and an electrode