Toward an Upper-Limb Neurorehabilitation Platform Based on FES-Assisted Bilateral Movement: Decoding User’s Intentionality

  • Andres Felipe Ruiz-OlayaEmail author
  • Alberto López-Delis
  • Alexander Cerquera
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9107)


In the last years there has been a noticeable progress in motor learning, neuroplasticity and functional recovery after the occurrence of brain lesion. Rehabilitation of motor function has been associated to motor learning that occurs during repetitive, frequent and intensive training. Neuro-rehabilitation is based on the assumption that motor learning principles can be applied to motor recovery after injury, and that training can lead to permanent improvements of motor functions in patients with muscle deficits. The emergent research field of Rehabilitation Engineering may provide promise technologies for neuro-rehabilitation therapies, exploiting the motor learning and neural plasticity concepts. Among those technologies, the FES-assisted systems could provide repetitive training-based therapies and have been developed to aid or control the upper and lower limbs movements in response to user’s intentionality. Surface electromyography (SEMG) reflects directly the human motion intention, so it can be used as input information to control an active FES-assisted system. The present work describes a neurorehabilitation platform at the upper-limb level, based on bilateral coordination training (i.e. mirror movements with the unaffected arm) using a close-loop active FES system controlled by user. In this way, this work presents a novel myoelectric controller for decoding movements of user to be employed in a neurorehabilitation platform. It was carried out a set of experiments to validate the myoelectric controller in classification of seven human upper-limb movements, obtaining an average classification error of 4.3%. The results suggest that the proposed myoelectric pattern recognition method may be applied to control close-loop FES system.


Root Mean Square Functional Electrical Stimulation Motor Recovery Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation Myoelectric Control 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dietz, V., Nef, T., Rymer, W.Z.: Neurorehabilitation technology. Springer (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sharma, N., Classen, J., Cohen, L.G.: Neural plasticity and its contribution to functional recovery. In: Handbook of Clinical Neurology, vol. 110, pp. 3–12 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moller, A.R.: Neural plasticity and disorders of the nervous system. Cambridge University Press (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hara, Y., Obayashi, S., Tsujiuchi, K., Muraoka, Y.: The effects of electromyography-controlled functional electrical stimulation on upper extremity function and cortical perfusion in stroke patients. Clinical Neurophysiology 124, 2008–2015 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sheffler, L., Chae, J.: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation in neurorehabilitation. Muscle Nerve 35, 562–590 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Doucet, B.M., Lamb, A., Griffin, L.: Neuromuscular electrical stimulation for skeletal muscle function. The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine 85, 201–215 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hamid, S., Hayek, R.: Role of electrical stimulation for rehabilitation and regeneration after spinal cord injury: an overview. Eur. Spine J. 17, 1256–1269 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sabut, S.K., Sikdar, C., Mondal, R., Kumar, R., Mahadevappa, M.: Restoration of gait and motor recovery by functional electrical stimulation therapy in persons with stroke. Disability and Rehabilitation 32(19), 1594–1603 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Popovic, L., Jorgovanovic, N., Ilic, V., Dosen, S., Keller, T., Popovic, M.B., Popovic, D.B.: Electrical stimulation for the suppression of pathological tremor. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 49, 1187–1193 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wolczowski, A., Kurzynski, M.: Human-machine interface in bioprosthesis control using EMG signal classification. Expert Systems 27, 53–70 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Farina, D., Negro, F.: Accessing the neural drive to muscle and translation to neurorehabilitation technologies. IEEE Reviews in Biomedical Engineering 5, 3–14 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Oskoei, M.A., Hu, H.: Myoelectric control systems–A survey. Biomedical Signal Processing and Control 2, 275–294 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jamison, J.C., Caldwell, G.E.: Muscle synergies and isometric torque production: Influence of supination and pronation level on elbow flexion. J. Neurophys. 70(3), 947–960 (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Englehart, K., Hudgins, B.: A robust real-time control scheme for multifunctionmyoelectric control. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 50(7), 848–854 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tarkka, I.M., Pitkanen, K., Popovic, D.J., Vanninen, R., Kononen, M.: Functional Electrical Therapy for Hemiparesis Alleviates Disability and Enhances Neuroplasticity. J. Exp. Med. 225, 71–76 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kimberley, T.J., Lewis, S.M., Auerbach, E.J., Dorsey, L.L., Lojovich, J.M., Carey, J.R.: Electrical stimulation driving functional improvements and cortical changes in subjects with stroke. Experimental Brain Research 154, 450–460 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Shin, H.K., Cho, S.H., Jeon, H.S., Lee, Y.H., Song, J.C., Jang, S.H., Lee, C.H., Kwon, Y.H.: Cortical effect and functional recovery by the electromyography-triggered neuromuscular stimulation in chronic stroke patients. Neuroscience Letters 442, 174–179 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sheffler, L., Chae, J.: Technological Advances in Interventions to Enhance Poststroke Gait. Phys. Med. Rehabil. Clin. N. Am. 24, 305–323 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cauraugh, J.H., Kim, S.: Two Coupled Motor Recovery Protocols Are Better Than One: Electromyogram-Triggered Neuromuscular Stimulation and Bilateral Movements. Stroke 33, 1589–1594 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stewart, K.C., Cauraugh, J.H., Summers, J.J.: Bilateral movement training and stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the Neurological Sciences 244, 89–95 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Knutson, J.S., Harley, M.Y., Hisel, T.Z., Makowski, N.Z., Fu, M.J., Chae, J.: Contralaterally Controlled Functional Electrical Stimulation for Stroke Rehabilitation. In: Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc., pp. 314–317 (August 2012)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Surface electromyography for the non-invasive assessment of muscles project. web page,
  23. 23.
    Huang, Y.H., Englehart, K., Hudgins, B.S., Chan, A.D.C.: A Gaussian mixture model based classification scheme for myoelectric control of powered upper limb prostheses. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 52(11), 1801–1811 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Phinyomark, A., Phukpattaranont, P., Limsakul, C.: Feature reduction and selection for EMG signal classification. Expert Systems with Applications 39, 7420–7431 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andres Felipe Ruiz-Olaya
    • 1
    Email author
  • Alberto López-Delis
    • 2
  • Alexander Cerquera
    • 1
  1. 1.Facultad de Ingeniería Electrónica y BiomédicaUniversidad Antonio NariñoBogotáColombia
  2. 2.Centro de Biofísica MédicaUniversidad de OrienteSantiago de CubaCuba

Personalised recommendations