Skip to main content
Log in

Learning from brain control: clinical application of brain–computer interfaces

  • Review article
  • Published:
e-Neuroforum

An Erratum to this article was published on 17 November 2015

Abstract

Brain–computer interfaces (BCI) use neuroelectric and metabolic brain activity to activate peripheral devices and computers without mediation of the motor system. In order to activate the BCI patients have to learn a certain amount of brain control. Self-regulation of brain activity was found to follow the principles of skill learning and instrumental conditioning. This review focuses on the clinical application of brain–computer interfaces in paralyzed patients with locked-in syndrome and completely locked-in syndrome (CLIS). It was shown that electroencephalogram (EEG)-based brain–computer interfaces allow selection of letters and words in a computer menu with different types of EEG signals. However, in patients with CLIS without any muscular control, particularly of eye movements, classical EEG-based brain–computer interfaces were not successful. Even after implantation of electrodes in the human brain, CLIS patients were unable to communicate. We developed a theoretical model explaining this fundamental deficit in instrumental learning of brain control and voluntary communication: patients in complete paralysis extinguish goal-directed response-oriented thinking and intentions. Therefore, a reflexive classical conditioning procedure was developed and metabolic brain signals measured with near infrared spectroscopy were used in CLIS patients to answer simple questions with a “yes” or “no”-brain response. The data collected so far are promising and show that for the first time CLIS patients communicate with such a BCI system using metabolic brain signals and simple reflexive learning tasks. Finally, brain machine interfaces and rehabilitation in chronic stroke are described demonstrating in chronic stroke patients without any residual upper limb movement a surprising recovery of motor function on the motor level as well as on the brain level. After extensive combined BCI training with behaviorally oriented physiotherapy, significant improvement in motor function was shown in this previously intractable paralysis. In conclusion, clinical application of brain machine interfaces in well-defined and circumscribed neurological disorders have demonstrated surprisingly positive effects. The application of BCIs to psychiatric and clinical–psychological problems, however, at present did not result in substantial improvement of complex behavioral disorders.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Birbaumer N, Elbert T, Canavan A, Rockstroh B (1990) Slow potentials of the cerebral cortex and behavior. Physiol Rev 70:1–41

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Birbaumer N, Ghanayim N, Hinterberger T, Iversen I, Kotchoubey B, Kübler A, Perelmouter J, Taub E, Flor H (1999) A spelling device for the paralysed. Nature 398:297–298

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Birbaumer N, Ruiz S, Sitaram R (2013) Learned regulation of brain metabolism. Trends Cogn Sci 17(6):295–302

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Buch ER, Shanechi AM, Fourkas AD, Weber C, Birbaumer N, Cohen LG (2012) Parietofrontal integrity determines neural modulation associated with grasping imagery after stroke. Brain 135:596–614

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chaudhary U, Bin X, Cohen L, Silvoni S, Birbaumer N (submitted) Unlocking the locked-in: brain communication in the completely locked-in state

  6. Collinger JL, Wodlinger B, Downey JE, Wang W, Tyler-Kabara EC, Weber DJ, McMorland AJ, Velliste M, Boninger ML, Schwartz AB (2013) High-performance neuroprosthetic control by an individual with tetraplegia. Lancet 381(9866):557–564

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fetz EE (1969) Operant conditioning of cortical unit activity. Science 163:955–958

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gallegos-Ayala G, Furdea A, Takano K, Ruf CA, Flor H, Birbaumer N (2014) Brain communication in a completely locked-in patient using bedside near-infrared spectroscopy. Neurology 82:1–3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hochberg LR, Serruya MD, Friehs GM, Mukand JA, Saleh M, Caplan AH, Branner A, Chen D, Penn RD, Donoghue JP (2006) Neuronal ensemble control of prosthetic devices by a human with tetraplegia. Nature 442:164–171

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hochberg LR, Bacher D, Jarosiewicz B, Masse NY, Simeral JD, Vogel J, Haddadin S, Liu J, Cash SS, van der Smagt P, Donoghue JP (2012) Reach and grasp by people with tetraplegia using a neurally controlled robotic arm. Nature 485:372–375

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Koralek AC, Jin X, Long JD II, Costa RM, Carmena JM (2012). Corticostriatal plasticity is necessary for learning intentional neuroprosthetic skills. Nature 483(7389):331–5

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kotchoubey B, Strehl U, Uhlmann C, Holzapfel S, König M, Fröscher W et al (2001) Modification of slow cortical potentials in patients with refractory epilepsy: a controlled outcome study. Epilepsia 42(3):406–416

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kübler A, Birbaumer N (2008) Brain-computer interfaces and communication in paralysis: extinction of goal directed thinking in completely paralysed patients? Clin Neurophysiol 119:2658–2666

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ramos-Murguialday A et al (2013). Brain-machine-interface in chronic stroke rehabilitation: a controlled study. Ann Neurol 74,100–108

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Wolf SL, Winstein CJ, Miller JP et al (2006) Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on upper extremity function 3 to 9 months after stroke: the EXCITE randomized clinical trial. JAMA 296:2095–2104

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Mit Förderung der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, Koselleck-Projekt), Neuroarbeitswissenschaft Baden-Württemberg und EMOIO-Projekt (BMBF Nr. 16SV7196), Stiftung Volkswagenwerk (VW), Eva und Horst Köhler-Stiftung, Baden-Württemberg-Stiftung.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Niels Birbaumer.

Additional information

This document has been translated to English by Karin Moan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Birbaumer, N., Chaudhary, U. Learning from brain control: clinical application of brain–computer interfaces. e-Neuroforum 6, 87–95 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13295-015-0015-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13295-015-0015-x

Keywords

Navigation