ABSTRACT
Most transradial prosthesis users with conventional "Sequential" myoelectric control have two electrode sites which control one degree of freedom (DoF) at a time. Rapid EMG co-activation toggles control between DoFs (e.g., hand and wrist), providing limited function. We implemented a regression-based EMG control method which achieved simultaneous and proportional control of two DoFs in a virtual task. We automated electrode site selection using a short-duration (90 s) calibration period, without force feedback. Backward stepwise selection located the best electrodes for either six or 12 electrodes (selected from a pool of 16). We additionally studied two, 2-DoF controllers: "Intuitive" control (hand open-close and wrist pronation-supination controlled virtual target size and rotation, respectively) and "Mapping" control (wrist flexion-extension and ulnar-radial deviation controlled virtual target left-right and up-down movement, respectively). In practice, a Mapping controller would be mapped to control prosthesis hand open-close and wrist pronation-supination. Eleven able-bodied subjects and 4 limb-absent subjects completed virtual target matching tasks (fixed target moves to a new location after being "matched," and subject immediately pursues) and fixed (static) target tasks. For all subjects, both 2-DoF controllers with 6 optimally-sited electrodes had statistically better target matching performance than Sequential control in number of matches (average of 4-7 vs. 2 matches, p< 0.001) and throughput (average of 0.75-1.25 vs. 0.4 bits/s, p< 0.001), but not overshoot rate and path efficiency. There were no statistical differences between 6 and 12 optimally-sited electrodes for both 2-DoF controllers. These results support the feasibility of 2-DoF simultaneous, proportional myoelectric control.
ABSTRACT
Recent research has advanced two degree-of-freedom (DoF), simultaneous, independent and proportional control of hand-wrist prostheses using surface electromyogram signals from remnant muscles as the control input. We evaluated two such regression-based controllers, along with conventional, sequential two-site control with co-contraction mode switching (SeqCon), in box-block, refined-clothespin and door-knob tasks, on 10 able-bodied and 4 limb-absent subjects. Subjects operated a commercial hand and wrist using a socket bypass harness. One 2-DoF controller (DirCon) related the intuitive hand actions of open-close and pronation-supination to the associated prosthesis hand-wrist actions, respectively. The other (MapCon) mapped myoelectrically more distinct, but less intuitive, actions of wrist flexion-extension and ulnar-radial deviation. Each 2-DoF controller was calibrated from separate 90 s calibration contractions. SeqCon performed better statistically than MapCon in the predominantly 1-DoF box-block task (>20 blocks/minute vs. 8-18 blocks/minute, on average). In this task, SeqCon likely benefited from an ability to easily focus on 1-DoF and not inadvertently trigger co-contraction for mode switching. The remaining two tasks require 2-DoFs, and both 2-DoF controllers each performed better (factor of 2-4) than SeqCon. We also compared the use of 12 vs. 6 optimally-selected EMG electrodes as inputs, finding no statistical difference. Overall, we provide further evidence of the benefits of regression-based EMG prosthesis control of 2-DoFs in the hand-wrist.
