These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Optimality of multisensory integration while compensating for uncertain visual target information with artificial vibrotactile cues during reach planning.
    Author: Amann LK, Casasnovas V, Hainke J, Gail A.
    Journal: J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2024 Sep 09; 21(1):155. PubMed ID: 39252006.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Planning and executing movements requires the integration of different sensory modalities, such as vision and proprioception. However, neurological diseases like stroke can lead to full or partial loss of proprioception, resulting in impaired movements. Recent advances focused on providing additional sensory feedback to patients to compensate for the sensory loss, proving vibrotactile stimulation to be a viable option as it is inexpensive and easy to implement. Here, we test how such vibrotactile information can be integrated with visual signals to estimate the spatial location of a reach target. METHODS: We used a center-out reach paradigm with 31 healthy human participants to investigate how artificial vibrotactile stimulation can be integrated with visual-spatial cues indicating target location. Specifically, we provided multisite vibrotactile stimulation to the moving dominant arm using eccentric rotating mass (ERM) motors. As the integration of inputs across multiple sensory modalities becomes especially relevant when one of them is uncertain, we additionally modulated the reliability of visual cues. We then compared the weighing of vibrotactile and visual inputs as a function of visual uncertainty to predictions from the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) framework to decide if participants achieve quasi-optimal integration. RESULTS: Our results show that participants could estimate target locations based on vibrotactile instructions. After short training, combined visual and vibrotactile cues led to higher hit rates and reduced reach errors when visual cues were uncertain. Additionally, we observed lower reaction times in trials with low visual uncertainty when vibrotactile stimulation was present. Using MLE predictions, we found that integration of vibrotactile and visual cues followed optimal integration when vibrotactile cues required the detection of one or two active motors. However, if estimating the location of a target required discriminating the intensities of two cues, integration violated MLE predictions. CONCLUSION: We conclude that participants can quickly learn to integrate visual and artificial vibrotactile information. Therefore, using additional vibrotactile stimulation may serve as a promising way to improve rehabilitation or the control of prosthetic devices by patients suffering loss of proprioception.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]