Evaluating Commercial Electrical Neuromodulation Devices with Low-Cost Neural Phantoms
Source abstract
Abstract
Non-invasive transcranial electrical stimulation is a category of neuromodulation techniques used for various disorders. Although medically approved devices exist, the variety of consumer electrical stimulation devices is increasing. Because clinical trials and animal tests are costly and risky, using a brain phantom can provide preliminary experimental validation. However, existing brain phantoms are often costly or require excessive preparation time, precluding their use for rapid, real-time optimization of stimulation settings. A limitation of direct electric fields in a phantom is the lack of 3D spatial resolution. Using well-researched modalities such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and newer modalities such as amplitude-modulated transcranial pulsed-current stimulation (am-tPCS), a range of materials was tested for use as electrical phantoms. Based on cost, preparation time, and efficiency, ground beef and agar gel with a 10% salt mix were selected. The measured values for the total dosages were 0.55 W-s for am-tPCS and 0.91 W-s for tDCS. Due to a low gain on the recording electrodes, the signal efficiency measured against the power delivered was 4.2% for tDCS and 3.1% for am-tPCS. Issues included electrodes shifting in the soft material and the low sensitivity of the recording electrodes. Despite these issues, the effective combination of the phantom and recording methodologies can enable low costs and the rapid testing, experimentation, and verification of consumer neuromodulation devices in three dimensions. Additionally, the efficiency factors (EFs) between the observed dosage and the delivered dosage could streamline the comparison of experimental configurations. As demonstrated by comparing two types of electrical neuromodulation devices across the 3D space of a phantom, EFs can be used in conjunction with a cost-effective, time-expedient phantom to rapidly iterate and optimize stimulation parameters.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies · Neuroscience and Neural Engineering · Muscle activation and electromyography studies
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Wexner Medical Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
Electrical and Computer Engineering, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA
References (43)
Show source-provided references
1. Case Report of Transcranial Pulsed-Current Stimulation with Parkinson’s Disease
2. State-dependent effects of neural stimulation on brain function and cognition10.1038/s41583-022-00598-1 ↗
3. Transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS): From basic mechanisms towards first applications in psychiatry10.1007/s00406-020-01209-9 ↗
4. Evidence-based guidelines on the therapeutic use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)10.1016/j.clinph.2016.10.087 ↗
5. Transcranial pulsed current stimulation: A scoping review of the current literature on scope, nature, underlying mechanisms, and gaps10.1111/psyp.14521 ↗
6. Recommendations for responsible development and application of neurotechnologies10.1007/s12152-021-09468-6 ↗
7. Medeiros, W., Barros, T., and Caixeta, F.V. (2023). Bibliometric mapping of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques (NIBS) for fluent speech production. Front. Hum. Neurosci., 17.10.3389/fnhum.2023.1164890 ↗
8. tDCS for the treatment of depression: A comprehensive review10.1007/s00406-016-0674-9 ↗
9. Adverse events of tDCS and tACS: A review10.1016/j.cnp.2016.12.003 ↗
10. An in vivo-mimicking in vitro testbed for brain-computer interfaces10.1109/JERM.2019.2957694 ↗
11. Guido, K., Bringer, A., and Kiourti, A. (2020, January 5–10). Human Body Phantoms for Wideband Radiometry. Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Antennas and Propagation and North American Radio Science Meeting, Montreal, QC, Canada.10.1109/IEEECONF35879.2020.9330230 ↗
12. Investigating gelatine based head phantoms for electroencephalography compared to electrical and ex vivo porcine skin models10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3095220 ↗
13. Chew, K.M., Sudirman, R., Seman, N., and Yong, C.Y. (2012, January 28–30). Human brain phantom modeling based on relative permittivity dielectric properties. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Biotechnology, Macau, China.10.1109/iCBEB.2012.239 ↗
14. Daru, R.R., Rabby, M.M., Ko, T., Shinglot, Y., Raihan, R., and Adnan, A. (2024). Electrically Equivalent Head Tissue Materials for Electroencephalogram Study on Head Surrogates. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app14062495 ↗
15. Mashayekhi, F., Shanehsazzadeh, F., Vazifeh, A.R., and Fardmanesh, M. Development of a Controllably Homogenous Conductive Ballistic Gelatin as a Realistic Spinal Cord Phantom. Proceedings of the 2021 28th National and 6th International Iranian Conference, Proceedings of the International Iranian Conference on Biomedical Engineering, Tehran, Iran, 25–26 November 2021.10.1109/ICBME54433.2021.9750295 ↗
16. Tseghai, G.B., Malengier, B., Fante, K.A., and Van Langenhove, L. (2021). A long-lasting textile-based anatomically realistic head phantom for validation of EEG electrodes. Sensors, 21.10.3390/s21144658 ↗
17. Ramasubbu, R., Lang, S., and Kiss, Z.H. (2018). Dosing of electrical parameters in deep brain stimulation (DBS) for intractable depression: A review of clinical studies. Front. Psychiatry, 9.10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00302 ↗
18. Lopes Alho, E.J., Graciolli Cordeiro, J., Assumpcao de Monaco, B., and Russell Jagid, J. (2022). Introduction and History of Neuromodulation for Pain. Neuromodulation Techniques for Pain Treatment, Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-84778-4_1 ↗
19. Safety aspects of transcranial direct current stimulation concerning healthy subjects and patients10.1016/j.brainresbull.2007.01.004 ↗
20. Mikkonen, M., Laakso, I., Sumiya, M., Koyama, S., Hirata, A., and Tanaka, S. (2018). TMS motor thresholds correlate with TDCS electric field strengths in hand motor area. Front. Neurosci., 12.10.3389/fnins.2018.00426 ↗
21. Evidence of transcranial direct current stimulation generated electric fields at subthalamic level in human brain in vivo10.1016/j.brs.2018.03.006 ↗
22. tDCS changes in motor excitability are specific to orientation of current flow10.1016/j.brs.2017.11.001 ↗
23. Direct effects of transcranial electric stimulation on brain circuits in rats and humans10.1038/s41467-018-02928-3 ↗
24. Reducing the sensation of electrical stimulation with dry electrodes by using an array of constant current sources10.1016/j.medengphy.2017.11.001 ↗
25. The effects of transcranial random noise stimulation on motor function: A comprehensive review of the literature10.1016/j.physbeh.2023.114073 ↗
26. Threshold-level multiThreshold-level multipulse transcranial electrical stimulation of motor cortex for intraoperative monitoring of spinal motor tracts: Description of method and comparison to somatosensory evoked potential monitoring10.3171/jns.1998.88.3.0457 ↗
27. Wu, L., Liu, T., and Wang, J. (2021). Improving the effect of transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS): A systematic review. Front. Hum. Neurosci., 15.10.3389/fnhum.2021.652393 ↗
28. Anodal transcranial pulsed current stimulation: A novel technique to enhance corticospinal excitability10.1016/j.clinph.2013.08.025 ↗
29. U: The Mind Company (2021). Axis Operation Manual, U: The Mind Company.
30. Electric field distribution study in inhomogeneous biological tissues10.1002/jnm.2699 ↗
31. Finite-element modeling of needle electrodes in tissue from the perspective of frequent model computation10.1109/TBME.2003.818466 ↗
32. Al-Arifin, A. (2021). Development of a Realistic Tissue Mimicking Phantom Using Finite Element Method. [Master’s Thesis, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Islamic University of Technology (IUT)].
33. Safety of transcranial direct current stimulation: Evidence based update since 201610.1016/j.brs.2016.06.004 ↗
34. Individual head models for estimating the TMS-induced electric field in rat brain10.1038/s41598-020-74431-z ↗
35. Electric field strength and focality in electroconvulsive therapy and magnetic seizure therapy: A finite element simulation study10.1088/1741-2560/8/1/016007 ↗
36. Regulatory considerations for the clinical and research use of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS): Review and recommendations from an expert panel10.3109/10601333.2015.980944 ↗
37. Ohmic heating of meats: Electrical conductivities of whole meats and processed meat ingredients10.1016/j.meatsci.2009.07.005 ↗
38. In-vivo measurements of human brain tissue conductivity using focal electrical current injection through intracerebral multicontact electrodes10.1002/hbm.23431 ↗
39. Passive impedance matching for implanted brain–electrode interfaces10.1109/JERM.2019.2904024 ↗
40. Complex impedance and conductivity of agar-based ion-conducting polymer electrolytes10.1007/s00339-014-8979-x ↗
41. TheBrainDriver tDCS Instruction Manual (2024, March 01). TheBrainDriver; LLC. Available online: https://thebraindriver.com/pages/thebraindriver-tdcs-instruction-manual.
42. Effects of dual transcranial direct current stimulation and modified constraint-induced movement therapy to improve upper-limb function after stroke: A double-blinded, pilot randomized controlled trial10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2021.105928 ↗
43. Vlach, J., and Singhal, K. (1983). Computer Methods for Circuit Analysis and Design, Springer Science & Business Media.