OBJECTIVE: Current robotic prostheses developed for individuals with transradial amputation often lack physiological feedback, particularly proprioceptive information, which limits control precision and increases reliance on vision. APPROACH: This study investigates the effect of introducing non-invasive somatotopic feedback using transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) to convey hand aperture information, as an artificial form of proprioceptive feedback. Twenty healthy participants with intact limbs were divided into two groups: one receiving TENS-based feedback and one without feedback. Participants performed an aperture control task under visual and non-visual conditions, with some trials including a concurrent Stroop task to assess cognitive load. We hypothesized that providing non-invasive somatotopic proprioceptive feedback via TENS mitigates key control and integration challenges, leading to improved accuracy, faster learning, and reduced reliance on vision, without increasing cognitive demands. MAIN RESULTS: Under visual deprivation, participants receiving TENS feedback achieved significantly smaller aperture control errors than those without feedback, both under alternating visual conditions (p < 0.001) and under prolonged visual deprivation conditions (p = 0.017). From the very first trial, TENS-based feedback enabled control accuracy comparable to that with visual input. Although perceptual shifts affected control accuracy under dual-task conditions, the +TENS group maintained high cognitive performance and effective control toward perceived functional targets, suggesting that the artificial feedback nonetheless supported hand control in the presence of a secondary task. SIGNIFICANCE: These findings highlight the potential of noninvasive somatotopic proprioceptive feedback delivered through TENS to provide physiologically meaningful information and support future strategies for restoring proprioceptive function in prosthetic hand users.
Lecompte et al. (Wed,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: