Real-Time, Simultaneous Myoelectric Control Using Force and Position-Based Training Paradigms

• Published in: IEEE transactions on biomedical engineering Vol. 61; no. 2; pp. 279 - 287
• Main Authors: Ameri, Ali, Scheme, Erik J., Kamavuako, Ernest Nlandu, Englehart, Kevin B., Parker, Philip A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States IEEE 01.02.2014; The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE)
• Subjects: Adult; Biomedical Engineering - instrumentation; Constrained contractions; electromyogram; Electromyography; Electromyography - instrumentation; Electromyography - methods; Force; Forearm - physiology; Humans; Joints; Man-Machine Systems; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology; myoelectric control; powered prostheses; Prostheses and Implants; Protocols; Range of Motion, Articular; Real-time systems; Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted; Training; unconstrained contractions; Wrist; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0018-9294; 1558-2531; 1558-2531
• DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2013.2281595

In this paper, the simultaneous real-time control of multiple degrees of freedom (DOF) for myoelectric systems is investigated. The goal of this study, in which ten able-bodied subjects participated, was to directly compare three control paradigms of constrained (force targeted), unconstrained (position targeted) and resisted unconstrained (position targeted) limb contractions. Artificial neural networks (ANNs) were trained for simultaneous myoelectric control of the three degrees of freedom (DOFs) (wrist flexion-extension, abduction-adduction, and pronation-supination) using mirrored bilateral contractions. In the resisted unconstrained experiment, some resistance to movement was provided using flexible wrist braces in order to increase the required level of muscle activation. The force, in constrained experiments, and position, in unconstrained and resisted unconstrained experiments, were measured. The three protocols were compared off-line using estimation accuracies (R 2 ) and online using a real-time computer-based target acquisition test. The constrained control paradigm outperformed the unconstrained method in the abduction-adduction DOF (R constrained 2 = 90.8 ± 0.6, R unconstrained 2 = 85.6 ± 1.6) and pronation-supination DOF ( R constrained 2 = 88.5 ± 0.9, R unconstrained 2 = 82.3 ± 1.6), but no significant difference was found in the flexion-extension DOF. The constrained control method outperformed unconstrained control in two real-time testing metrics including completion time and path efficiency. The constrained method results, however, were not significantly different than those of the resisted unconstrained method (with braces) in both off-line and real-time tests. This suggests that the quality of control using constrained and unconstrained contraction-based myoelectric schemes is not appreciably different when using comparable levels of muscle activation.