Induction of Neural Plasticity Using a Low-Cost Open Source Brain-Computer Interface and a 3D-Printed Wrist Exoskeleton

Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have been proven to be useful for stroke rehabilitation, but there are a number of factors that impede the use of this technology in rehabilitation clinics and in home-use, the major factors including the usability and costs of the BCI system. The aims of this study were to develop a cheap 3D-printed wrist exoskeleton that can be controlled by a cheap open source BCI (OpenViBE), and to determine if training with such a setup could induce neural plasticity. Eleven healthy volunteers imagined wrist extensions, which were detected from single-trial electroencephalography (EEG), and in response to this, the wrist exoskeleton replicated the intended movement. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited using transcranial magnetic stimulation were measured before, immediately after, and 30 min after BCI training with the exoskeleton. The BCI system had a true positive rate of 86 ± 12% with 1.20 ± 0.57 false detections per minute. Compared to the measurement before the BCI training, the MEPs increased by 35 ± 60% immediately after and 67 ± 60% 30 min after the BCI training. There was no association between the BCI performance and the induction of plasticity. In conclusion, it is possible to detect imaginary movements using an open-source BCI setup and control a cheap 3D-printed exoskeleton that when combined with the BCI can induce neural plasticity. These findings may promote the availability of BCI technology for rehabilitation clinics and home-use. However, the usability must be improved, and further tests are needed with stroke patients

EEG Headset Evaluation for Detection of Single-Trial Movement Intention for Brain-Computer Interfaces

Brain–computer interfaces (BCIs) can be used in neurorehabilitation; however, the literature about transferring the technology to rehabilitation clinics is limited. A key component of a BCI is the headset, for which several options are available. The aim of this study was to test four commercially available headsets’ ability to record and classify movement intentions (movement-related cortical potentials—MRCPs). Twelve healthy participants performed 100 movements, while continuous EEG was recorded from the headsets on two different days to establish the reliability of the measures: classification accuracies of single-trials, number of rejected epochs, and signal-to-noise ratio. MRCPs could be recorded with the headsets covering the motor cortex, and they obtained the best classification accuracies (73%−77%). The reliability was moderate to good for the best headset (a gel-based headset covering the motor cortex). The results demonstrate that, among the evaluated headsets, reliable recordings of MRCPs require channels located close to the motor cortex and potentially a gel-based headset