Electrotactile feedback applications for hand and arm interactions: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and future directions

TL;DR

A technological overview of electrotactile feedback as well as a systematic review and meta-analysis of its applications for hand-based interactions are presented to offer a high-level overview into the state-of-art and suggest future directions.

Abstract

Haptic feedback is critical in a broad range of human-machine/computer-interaction applications. However, the high cost and low portability/wearability of haptic devices remain unresolved issues, severely limiting the adoption of this otherwise promising technology. Electrotactile interfaces have the advantage of being more portable and wearable due to their reduced actuators' size, as well as their lower power consumption and manufacturing cost. The applications of electrotactile feedback have been explored in human-computer interaction and human-machine-interaction for facilitating hand-based interactions in applications such as prosthetics, virtual reality, robotic teleoperation, surface haptics, portable devices, and rehabilitation. This paper presents a technological overview of electrotactile feedback, as well a systematic review and meta-analysis of its applications for hand-based interactions. We discuss the different electrotactile systems according to the type of application. We also discuss over a quantitative congregation of the findings, to offer a high-level overview into the state-of-art and suggest future directions. Electrotactile feedback systems showed increased portability/wearability, and they were successful in rendering and/or augmenting most tactile sensations, eliciting perceptual processes, and improving performance in many scenarios. However, knowledge gaps (e.g., embodiment), technical (e.g., recurrent calibration, electrodes' durability) and methodological (e.g., sample size) drawbacks were detected, which should be addressed in future studies.

Figures (8)

• Figure 1: Type of Receptors and their respective Spatial and Temporal Resolution. Image derived from Yem2017b
• Figure 2: Electrotactile Stimulation: Cathodic Stimulation (Left) and Anodic Stimulation (Right) by either Epidermal or Subdermal Electrodes. The image is an adapted version of Figure 2 in Yem2017b
• Figure 3: PRISMA Step-Wise Method For Amassing & Parsing the Studies.
• Figure 4: Representative examples of electrotactile feedback systems per implementation: (a) transparent touchpad Zhao2018; (b) thin epidermal electrodes for augmented haptics Withana2018; (c) glove for dorsal hand stimulation Pamungkas2015b; (d) multi-finger stimulation Hummel2016; (e) armband for prosthetics Cheng2017; (f) armband for prosthetics Strbac2019; (g) braille reading system Rahimi2019b.
• Figure 5: Word cloud: findings frequency.