Brain-computer interfaces patient preferences: a systematic review.

Objective. Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) have the potential to restore motor capabilities and functional independence in individuals with motor impairments. Despite accelerating advances in the performance of implanted devices, few studies have identified patient preferences underlying device design, and each study typically captures a single aetiology of motor impairment. We aimed to characterise BCI patient preferences in a large cohort across multiple aetiologies.Approach. We performed a systematic review of all published studies reporting patient preferences for BCI devices, including both qualitative and quantitative data. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL from inception to 18 April 2023. Two reviewers independently screened articles and extracted data on demographic information, device use, invasiveness preference, device design, and functional preferences.Main results. From 1316 articles identified, 28 studies met inclusion criteria, capturing preferences from 1701 patients (mean age 42.1-64.3 years). The most represented conditions were amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (n= 15 studies, 53.6%) and spinal cord injury (n= 13 studies 46.4%). Individuals with motor impairments prioritised device accuracy over other design characteristics. In four studies where patients ranked performance characteristics, accuracy was ranked first each time. We found that the speed and accuracy of BCI systems in recent publications exceeds reported patient preferences, however this performance has been achieved with a level of training and setup burden that would not be tolerated by most patients. Preferences varied by disease aetiology and severity; amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients typically prioritised communication functions, whereas spinal cord injury patients emphasised limb control and sphincteric functions.Significance.Our findings highlight that despite advances in BCI performance exceeding patient expectations, there remains a need to reduce training and setup burdens to enhance usability. Moreover, patient preferences differ across conditions and impairment severities, underscoring the importance of personalised BCI configurations and tailored training regimens to meet individual needs.