Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/97712
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Biomedical Engineeringen_US
dc.creatorMcGeady, Cen_US
dc.creatorVučković, Aen_US
dc.creatorZheng, YPen_US
dc.creatorAlam, Men_US
dc.date.accessioned2023-03-09T07:42:57Z-
dc.date.available2023-03-09T07:42:57Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/97712-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherMolecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI)en_US
dc.rights© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication McGeady C, Vučković A, Zheng Y-P, Alam M. EEG Monitoring Is Feasible and Reliable during Simultaneous Transcutaneous Electrical Spinal Cord Stimulation. Sensors. 2021; 21(19):6593 is available at https://doi.org/10.3390/s21196593en_US
dc.subjectArtifact removalen_US
dc.subjectBCIen_US
dc.subjectBrain– computer interfaceen_US
dc.subjectElectroencephalographyen_US
dc.subjectRehabilitationen_US
dc.subjectTranscutaneous spinal cord stimulationen_US
dc.titleEEG monitoring is feasible and reliable during simultaneous transcutaneous electrical spinal cord stimulationen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume21en_US
dc.identifier.issue19en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/s21196593en_US
dcterms.abstractTranscutaneous electrical spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) is a non-invasive neuromodulatory technique that has in recent years been linked to improved volitional limb control in spinal-cord injured individuals. Although the technique is growing in popularity there is still uncertainty regarding the neural mechanisms underpinning sensory and motor recovery. Brain monitoring techniques such as electroencephalography (EEG) may provide further insights to the changes in coritcospinal excitability that have already been demonstrated using other techniques. It is unknown, however, whether intelligible EEG can be extracted while tSCS is being applied, owing to substantial high-amplitude artifacts associated with stimulation-based therapies. Here, for the first time, we characterise the artifacts that manifest in EEG when recorded simultaneously with tSCS. We recorded multi-channel EEG from 21 healthy volunteers as they took part in a resting state and movement task across two sessions: One with tSCS delivered to the cervical region of the neck, and one without tSCS. An offline analysis in the time and frequency domain showed that tSCS manifested as narrow, high-amplitude peaks with a spectral density contained at the stimulation frequency. We quantified the altered signals with descriptive statistics—kurtosis, root-mean-square, complexity, and zero crossings—and applied artifact-suppression techniques—superposition of moving averages, adaptive, median, and notch filtering—to explore whether the effects of tSCS could be suppressed. We found that the superposition of moving averages filter was the most successful technique at returning contaminated EEG to levels statistically similar to that of normal EEG. In the frequency domain, however, notch filtering was more effective at reducing the spectral power contribution of stimulation from frontal and central electrodes. An adaptive filter was more appropriate for channels closer to the stimulation site. Lastly, we found that tSCS posed no detriment the binary classification of upper-limb movements from sensorimotor rhythms, and that adaptive filtering resulted in poorer classification performance. Overall, we showed that, depending on the analysis, EEG monitoring during transcutaneous electrical spinal cord stimulation is feasible. This study supports future investigations using EEG to study the activity of the sensorimotor cortex during tSCS, and potentially paves the way to brain–computer interfaces operating in the presence of spinal stimulation.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationSensors, Oct. 2021, v. 21, no. 19, 6593en_US
dcterms.isPartOfSensorsen_US
dcterms.issued2021-10-
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000708165900001-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85116135716-
dc.identifier.pmid34640913-
dc.identifier.eissn1424-8220en_US
dc.identifier.artn6593en_US
dc.description.validate202303 bcwwen_US
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Scopus/WOS-
dc.description.fundingSourceOthersen_US
dc.description.fundingTextResearch Councils UK, RCUK: EP/N509668/1; University of Glasgow; Hong Kong Polytechnic University, PolyUen_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.description.oaCategoryCCen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
McGeady_EEG_monitoring_feasible.pdf2.66 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

93
Last Week
0
Last month
Citations as of Nov 9, 2025

Downloads

24
Citations as of Nov 9, 2025

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

16
Citations as of Dec 19, 2025

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

13
Citations as of Dec 18, 2025

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.