Long-Term Training with a Brain-Machine Interface-Based Gait Protocol Induces Partial Neurological Recovery in Paraplegic Patients

Scientific Reports, 2016 · DOI: 10.1038/srep30383 · Published: August 11, 2016

Spinal Cord Injury Neurology Neurorehabilitation

Simple Explanation

Brain-machine interfaces (BMIs) are being explored as a way to help people with paralysis regain movement. This study investigated whether long-term training with a BMI-based gait protocol could lead to clinical recovery in paraplegic patients. After 12 months of training, all eight patients showed improvements in sensation and voluntary motor control below the level of their spinal cord injury.

Study Duration

12 months

Participants

Eight chronic spinal cord injury paraplegics

Evidence Level

Not specified

Key Findings

1
All eight patients experienced neurological improvements in somatic sensation in multiple dermatomes.
2
Patients regained voluntary motor control in key muscles below the SCI level, as measured by EMGs, resulting in marked improvement in their walking index.
3
50% of these patients were upgraded to an incomplete paraplegia classification.

Research Summary

This study investigated the effects of long-term training with a multi-stage BMI-based gait neurorehabilitation paradigm on chronic SCI paraplegics. The training paradigm combined virtual reality, enriched visual-tactile feedback, and EEG-controlled robotic actuators. The results showed unprecedented neurological recovery in patients, suggesting cortical and spinal cord plasticity triggered by long-term BMI usage.

Practical Implications

Rehabilitation Potential

BMI applications should be upgraded from assistive technology to a neurorehabilitation therapy.

Early Intervention

Repeat the study with patients who suffered SCI a few months prior to initiation of BMI training.

Mechanism Understanding

Further research is needed to determine the exact mechanisms of cortical and spinal cord plasticity.

Study Limitations

1
The lack of specificity of the clinical method employed to evaluate temperature sensing
2
Small sample size of eight patients
3
The study lacks a control group

Your Feedback

Was this summary helpful?

Back to Spinal Cord Injury