Brannigan Jamie F M, Liyanage Kishan, Horsfall Hugo Layard, Bashford Luke, Muirhead William, Fry Adam
Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Department of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
J Neural Eng. 2024 Dec 10;21(6). doi: 10.1088/1741-2552/ad94a6.
. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have the potential to restore motor capabilities and functional independence in individuals with motor impairments. Despite accelerating advances in the performance of implanted devices, few studies have identified patient preferences underlying device design, and each study typically captures a single aetiology of motor impairment. We aimed to characterise BCI patient preferences in a large cohort across multiple aetiologies.. We performed a systematic review of all published studies reporting patient preferences for BCI devices, including both qualitative and quantitative data. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL from inception to 18 April 2023. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted data on demographic information, device use, invasiveness preference, device design, and functional preferences.. From 1316 articles identified, 28 studies met inclusion criteria, capturing preferences from 1701 patients (mean age 42.1-64.3 years). The most represented conditions were amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (= 15 studies, 53.6%) and spinal cord injury (= 13 studies 46.4%). Individuals with motor impairments prioritised device accuracy over other design characteristics. In four studies where patients ranked performance characteristics, accuracy was ranked first each time. We found that the speed and accuracy of BCI systems in recent publications exceeds reported patient preferences, however this performance has been achieved with a level of training and setup burden that would not be tolerated by most patients. Preferences varied by disease aetiology and severity; amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients typically prioritised communication functions, whereas spinal cord injury patients emphasised limb control and sphincteric functions.Our findings highlight that despite advances in BCI performance exceeding patient expectations, there remains a need to reduce training and setup burdens to enhance usability. Moreover, patient preferences differ across conditions and impairment severities, underscoring the importance of personalised BCI configurations and tailored training regimens to meet individual needs.
脑机接口(BCIs)有潜力恢复运动功能受损个体的运动能力和功能独立性。尽管植入设备的性能进步加速,但很少有研究确定设备设计背后的患者偏好,而且每项研究通常只涵盖单一单一单一的单一运动障碍病因。我们旨在描述多个病因的大型队列中脑机接口患者的偏好。我们对所有已发表的报告脑机接口设备患者偏好的研究进行了系统综述,包括定性和定量数据。我们检索了从创刊到2023年4月18日的MEDLINE、Embase和CINAHL数据库。两名审稿人独立筛选文章,并提取有关人口统计学信息、设备使用、侵入性偏好、设备设计和功能偏好的数据。从识别出的1316篇文章中,28项研究符合纳入标准,涵盖了1701名患者的偏好(平均年龄42.1 - 64.3岁)。最具代表性的疾病是肌萎缩侧索硬化(15项研究,占53.6%)和脊髓损伤(13项研究,占46.4%)。运动功能受损个体将设备准确性置于其他设计特征之上。在四项患者对性能特征进行排名的研究中,准确性每次都排名第一。我们发现,近期出版物中脑机接口系统的速度和准确性超过了报告的患者偏好,然而,这种性能的实现伴随着一定程度的训练和设置负担,大多数患者无法忍受。偏好因疾病病因和严重程度而异;肌萎缩侧索硬化患者通常优先考虑通信功能,而脊髓损伤患者则强调肢体控制和括约肌功能。我们的研究结果表明,尽管脑机接口性能的进步超出了患者的期望,但仍需要减轻训练和设置负担以提高可用性。此外,患者偏好在不同病情和损伤严重程度之间存在差异,这凸显了个性化脑机接口配置和量身定制的训练方案以满足个体需求的重要性。