↓ Skip to main content

Restoration of motor control and proprioceptive and cutaneous sensation in humans with prior upper-limb amputation via multiple Utah Slanted Electrode Arrays (USEAs) implanted in residual peripheral…

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
169 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
279 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Restoration of motor control and proprioceptive and cutaneous sensation in humans with prior upper-limb amputation via multiple Utah Slanted Electrode Arrays (USEAs) implanted in residual peripheral arm nerves
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12984-017-0320-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Suzanne Wendelken, David M. Page, Tyler Davis, Heather A. C. Wark, David T. Kluger, Christopher Duncan, David J. Warren, Douglas T. Hutchinson, Gregory A. Clark

Abstract

Despite advances in sophisticated robotic hands, intuitive control of and sensory feedback from these prostheses has been limited to only 3-degrees-of-freedom (DOF) with 2 sensory percepts in closed-loop control. A Utah Slanted Electrode Array (USEA) has been used in the past to provide up to 81 sensory percepts for human amputees. Here, we report on the advanced capabilities of multiple USEAs implanted in the residual peripheral arm nerves of human amputees for restoring control of 5 DOF and sensation of up to 131 proprioceptive and cutaneous hand sensory percepts. We also demonstrate that USEA-restored sensory percepts provide a useful source of feedback during closed-loop virtual prosthetic hand control. Two 100-channel USEAs were implanted for 4-5 weeks, one each in the median and ulnar arm nerves of two human subjects with prior long-duration upper-arm amputations. Intended finger and wrist positions were decoded from neuronal firing patterns via a modified Kalman filter, allowing subjects to control many movements of a virtual prosthetic hand. Additionally, USEA microstimulation was used to evoke numerous sensory percepts spanning the phantom hand. Closed-loop control was achieved by stimulating via an electrode of the ulnar-nerve USEA while recording and decoding movement via the median-nerve USEA. Subjects controlled up to 12 degrees-of-freedom during informal, 'freeform' online movement decode sessions, and experienced up to 131 USEA-evoked proprioceptive and cutaneous sensations spanning the phantom hand. Independent control was achieved for a 5-DOF real-time decode that included flexion/extension of the thumb, index, middle, and ring fingers, and the wrist. Proportional control was achieved for a 4-DOF real-time decode. One subject used a USEA-evoked hand sensation as feedback to complete a 1-DOF closed-loop virtual-hand movement task. There were no observed long-term functional deficits due to the USEA implants. Implantation of high-channel-count USEAs enables multi-degree-of-freedom control of virtual prosthetic hand movement and restoration of a rich selection of both proprioceptive and cutaneous sensory percepts spanning the hand during the short 4-5 week post-implant period. Future USEA use in longer-term implants and in closed-loop may enable restoration of many of the capabilities of an intact hand while contributing to a meaningful embodiment of the prosthesis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 279 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 279 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 56 20%
Researcher 38 14%
Student > Master 33 12%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 6%
Other 29 10%
Unknown 73 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 100 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 32 11%
Neuroscience 22 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 3%
Computer Science 6 2%
Other 26 9%
Unknown 86 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 December 2019.
All research outputs
#3,268,165
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#178
of 1,291 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,833
of 438,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#9
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,291 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.