Reconnecting Minds to the World: Patient Perspectives on Brain-Computer Interface After High Cervical Spinal Cord Injury.

IF 2.8 Q1 REHABILITATION
Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM Pub Date : 2026-06-01 Epub Date: 2026-06-22 DOI:10.5535/arm.260018
Youho Myong, Eunkyung Kim, Gain Shin, Eunseo Oh, Byung-Mo Oh
{"title":"Reconnecting Minds to the World: Patient Perspectives on Brain-Computer Interface After High Cervical Spinal Cord Injury.","authors":"Youho Myong, Eunkyung Kim, Gain Shin, Eunseo Oh, Byung-Mo Oh","doi":"10.5535/arm.260018","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To explore the perspectives of individuals with high cervical spinal cord injury (C-SCI) regarding expectations, concerns, and desired applications of brain-computer interface (BCI).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A structured focus group interview was conducted with four individuals with chronic high cervical spinal cord injury, all with neurological levels of C4 or above. Pre- and post-interview questionnaires were administered to assess expectations, concerns, and acceptance of BCI before and after discussion. The interview was facilitated by experts in rehabilitation medicine and biomedical engineering, and qualitative data were analyzed inductively to identify key themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five major themes emerged: digital accessibility, offline physical activity, social interactions and psychological health, usability, and acceptance. Participants expressed strong interest in using BCI to improve digital independence, particularly for messaging, online banking, internet use, and smart home control. They also viewed BCI as a potential tool to enhance autonomy in daily activities and reduce reliance on caregivers. Most participants were open to training and, in some cases, invasive procedures; however, concerns regarding surgical safety, device maintenance, reliability, and practical usability were frequently raised. Views on the emotional and social impact of BCI varied across individuals. Questionnaire responses showed increased willingness to undergo invasive procedures after the focus group interview, while expected functional outcomes became more realistic, suggesting that structured group discussion may have shaped participants' understanding of BCI.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>BCI was perceived as a promising pathway to greater independence, participation, and autonomy among individuals with high C-SCI. These findings emphasize user-centered design and demonstrate how lived experience can guide assistive neurotechnology development in rehabilitation research.</p>","PeriodicalId":47738,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM","volume":" ","pages":"168-178"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13329517/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Rehabilitation Medicine-ARM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.260018","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/6/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To explore the perspectives of individuals with high cervical spinal cord injury (C-SCI) regarding expectations, concerns, and desired applications of brain-computer interface (BCI).

Methods: A structured focus group interview was conducted with four individuals with chronic high cervical spinal cord injury, all with neurological levels of C4 or above. Pre- and post-interview questionnaires were administered to assess expectations, concerns, and acceptance of BCI before and after discussion. The interview was facilitated by experts in rehabilitation medicine and biomedical engineering, and qualitative data were analyzed inductively to identify key themes.

Results: Five major themes emerged: digital accessibility, offline physical activity, social interactions and psychological health, usability, and acceptance. Participants expressed strong interest in using BCI to improve digital independence, particularly for messaging, online banking, internet use, and smart home control. They also viewed BCI as a potential tool to enhance autonomy in daily activities and reduce reliance on caregivers. Most participants were open to training and, in some cases, invasive procedures; however, concerns regarding surgical safety, device maintenance, reliability, and practical usability were frequently raised. Views on the emotional and social impact of BCI varied across individuals. Questionnaire responses showed increased willingness to undergo invasive procedures after the focus group interview, while expected functional outcomes became more realistic, suggesting that structured group discussion may have shaped participants' understanding of BCI.

Conclusion: BCI was perceived as a promising pathway to greater independence, participation, and autonomy among individuals with high C-SCI. These findings emphasize user-centered design and demonstrate how lived experience can guide assistive neurotechnology development in rehabilitation research.

重新连接心灵与世界:高颈脊髓损伤后患者对脑机接口的看法。
目的:探讨重度颈脊髓损伤(C-SCI)患者对脑机接口(BCI)的期望、关注和期望应用。方法:对4例慢性高位颈脊髓损伤患者进行结构化焦点小组访谈,所有患者的神经学水平均为C4或以上。访谈前后分别进行问卷调查,以评估讨论前后对脑机接口的期望、关注和接受程度。访谈由康复医学和生物医学工程专家协助,并对定性数据进行归纳分析,以确定关键主题。结果:出现了五个主要主题:数字可及性、线下身体活动、社会互动和心理健康、可用性和接受度。与会者对使用脑机接口提高数字独立性表达了浓厚兴趣,特别是在消息传递、网上银行、互联网使用和智能家居控制方面。他们还认为脑机接口是一种潜在的工具,可以增强日常活动的自主性,减少对护理人员的依赖。大多数参与者接受培训,在某些情况下接受侵入性手术;然而,对手术安全性、设备维护、可靠性和实际可用性的担忧经常被提出。对脑机接口的情感和社会影响的看法因人而异。问卷调查结果显示,焦点小组访谈后接受侵入性手术的意愿增加,而预期的功能结果变得更加现实,这表明有组织的小组讨论可能塑造了参与者对脑机接口的理解。结论:BCI被认为是高C-SCI患者获得更大独立性、参与性和自主性的有希望的途径。这些发现强调了以用户为中心的设计,并展示了生活体验如何指导辅助神经技术在康复研究中的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
32
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书