Brain-Computer Interfaces in Post-Stroke Rehabilitation: A Narrative Review
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12982/BSCM.2026.48Keywords:
brain-computer interface, stroke rehabilitation, neuroplasticity, post-strokeAbstract
Neurological illnesses, in particular, stroke, are a major cause of ailment and health risk around the world and often leave people with long-term disability. Stroke survivors often face problems with moving, thinking, and their mental health, which significantly reduces their quality of life. In the past, physical, occupational, and speech therapy were the main types of therapy used in rehabilitation for stroke. These methods use the brain’s innate plasticity, i.e., its ability to reorganize and adapt after an injury, to bring back lost functions. Previous assessments of brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) for rehabilitation after a stroke have frequently failed in terms of clinical outcomes, long-term effectiveness, and/or with reintegration. Thus, it is imperative to review the therapeutic effectiveness, feasibility, and technological progress in BCI-based rehabilitation. This review focuses on
recent trends in BCI stroke rehabilitation as well as BCI hybridization, recognizing the effect of emotions and stroke feedback on emotional status change. The review also focuses on clinical issues, existing constraints, and future possibilities related to improving motor and cognitive results. This study focuses on clinical applications, current stroke treatment issues, and new developments.
References
1. Semprini M, Laffranchi M, Sanguineti V, Avanzino L, Icco RD, Michieli LD, et al. Technological approaches for neurorehabilitation: from robotic devices to brain stimulation and beyond. Front Neurol. 2018;9:212. PubMed PMID: 29686644
2. Stulberg E, Sachdev PS, Murray AM, Cramer SC, Sorond FA, Lakshminarayan K, et al. Post-stroke brain health monitoring and optimization: a narrative review. J Clin Med. 2023;12(23):7413. PubMed PMID: 38068464
3. Nudo RJ. Neural bases of recovery after brain injury. J Commun Disord. 2011;44:515-20.
4. Lew HL, Lombard LA, Reddy CC, Moroz A, Edgley SR, Chae J. Stroke and neurodegenerative disorders: 3. poststroke rehabilitation. PM R. 2009;1(3 Suppl):S19-26. PubMed PMID: 19627969
5. Dobkin BH. Strategies for stroke rehabilitation. Lancet Neurol. 2004;3:528-36.
6. Micera S, Caleo M, Chisari C, Hummel FC, Pedrocchi A. Advanced neurotechnologies for the restoration of motor function. Neuron. 2020;105:604-20.
7. Wolfe CD. The impact of stroke. Br Med Bull. 2000; 56:275-86.
8. Cramer SC. Repairing the human brain after stroke: I. mechanisms of spontaneous recovery. Ann Neurol. 2008;63:272-87.
9. Jeon BJ, Kim WH, Park EY. Effect of task-oriented training for people with stroke: a meta-analysis focused on repetitive or circuit training. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2015;22:34-43.
10. Nicolas-Alonso LF, Gomez-Gil J. Brain computer interfaces, a review. Sensors. 2012;12:1211-79.
11. Sellers EW, Donchin E. A P300-based brain-computer interface: initial tests by ALS patients. Clin Neurophysiol. 2006;117:538-48.
12. Miller KJ, Schalk G, Fetz EE, den Nijs M, Ojemann JG, Rao RP. Cortical activity during motor execution, motor imagery, and imagery-based online feedback. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:4430-5.
13. Birbaumer N, Cohen LG. Brain-computer interfaces: communication and restoration of movement in paralysis. J Physiol. 2007;579:621-36.
14. Wolpaw JR, Birbaumer N, McFarland DJ, Pfurtscheller G, Vaughan TM. Brain computer interfaces for communication and control. Clin Neurophysiol. 2002;113: 767-91.
15. Ietswaart M, Johnston M, Dijkerman HC, Joice S, Scott CL, MacWalter RS, et al. Mental practice with motor imagery in stroke recovery: randomized controlled trial of efficacy. Brain. 2011;134:1373-86.
16. Georgopoulos P, Lurito JT, Petrides M, Schwartz AB, Massey JT. Mental rotation of the neuronal population vector. Science. 1989; 243(4888):234-6.
17. Sharma N, Pomeroy VM, Baron JC. Motor imagery: a backdoor to the motor system after stroke? Stroke. 2006;37:1941-52.
18. Sharma N, Simmons LH, Jones PS, Day DJ, Carpenter TA, Pomeroy VM, et al. Motor imagery after subcortical stroke: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Stroke. 2009;40:1315-24.
19. Nojima I, Sugata H, Takeuchi H, Mima T. Brain–computer interface training based on brain activity can induce motor recovery in patients with stroke: A meta- analysis. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2022;36:83-96.
20. Daly JJ, Wolpaw JR. Brain-computer interfaces in neurological rehabilitation. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7:1032-43.
21. Maier M, Ballester BR, Verschure PFMJ. Principles of neurorehabilitation after stroke based on motor learning and brain plasticity mechanisms. Front Syst Neurosci. 2019;13:74. PubMed PMID: 31920570
22. Kim Y. Update on stroke rehabilitation in motor impairment. Brain Neurorehabil. 2022;15:e12. PubMed PMID: 36743199
23. Baniqued PDE, Stanyer EC, Awais M, Alazmani A, Jackson A, Mon‐Williams M, et al. Brain-computer interface robotics for hand rehabilitation after stroke: a systematic review. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2021;18(1):15. PubMed PMID: 33485365
24. Buch E, Weber C, Cohen LG, Braun C, Dimyan MA, Ard T, et al. Think to move: a neuromagnetic brain-computer interface (BCI) system for chronic stroke. Stroke. 2008;39:910-7.
25. Daly JJ, Cheng R, Rogers J, Litinas K, Hrovat K, Dohring M. Feasibility of a new application of noninvasive brain computer interface (BCI): a case study of training for recovery of volitional motor control after stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2009;33:203-11.
26. Ang KK, Guan C, Chua KSG, Ang BT, Kuah CWK, Wang C, et al. Clinical study of neurorehabilitation in stroke using EEG based motor imagery brain-computer interface with robotic feedback. Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2010;5549-52.
27. Broetz D, Braun C, Weber C, Soekadar SR, Caria A, Birbaumer N. Combination of brain-computer interface training and goal-directed physical therapy in chronic stroke: a case report. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2010;24:674-9.
28. Prasad G, Herman P, Coyle D, McDonough S, Crosbie J. Applying a brain-computer interface to support motor imagery practice in people with stroke for upper limb recovery: a feasibility study. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2010;7:60. PubMed PMID: 21156054
29. Ang KK, Guan C, Chua KSG, Ang BT, Kuah CWK, Wang C, et al. A large clinical study on the ability of stroke patients to use EEG-based motor imagery brain-computer interface. Clin EEG Neurosci. 2011;42:253-8.
30. Caria A, Weber C, Brotz D, Ramos A, Ticini LF, Gharabaghi A, et al. Chronic stroke recovery after combined BCI training and physiotherapy: a case report. Psychophysiology. 2011;48:578-82.
31. Shih JJ, Krusienski DJ, Wolpaw JR. Brain-computer interfaces in medicine. Mayo Clin Proc. 2012;87:268-79.
32. Gu X, Cao Z, Jolfaei A, Xu P, Wu D, Jung T, et al. EEG-based brain-computer interfaces (BCIs): a survey of recent studies on signal sensing technologies and computational intelligence approaches and their applications. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform. 2021;18:1645-66.
33. Zhang H, Jiao L, Yang S, Li H, Jiang X, Feng J, et al. Brain-computer interfaces: The innovative key to unlocking neurological conditions. Int J Surg. 2024;110: 5745-62.
34. Saha S, Mamun KA, Ahmed KI, Mostafa R, Naik GR, Darvishi S, et al. Progress in brain computer interface: challenges and opportunities. Front Syst Neurosci. 2021;15:578875. PubMed PMID: 33716680
35. Mak JN, Wolpaw JR. Clinical applications of brain-computer interfaces: current state and future prospects. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng. 2009;2:187-99.
36. Navarro X, Krueger TB, Lago N, Micera S, Stieglitz T, Dario P. A critical review of interfaces with the peripheral nervous system for the control of neuroprostheses and hybrid bionic systems. J Peripher Nerv Syst. 2005;10:229-58.
37. Wolpaw JR, Millán JDR, Ramsey NF. Brain-computer interfaces: Definitions and principles. Handb Clin Neurol. 2020;168:15-23.
38. Stikic M, Berka C, Levendowski DJ, Rubio RF, Tan V, Korszen S, et al. Modeling temporal sequences of cognitive state changes based on a combination of EEG-engagement, EEG-workload, and heart rate metrics. Front Neurosci. 2014;8:342. PubMed PMID: 25414629
39. Brouwer AM, Zander TO, van Erp JB, Korteling JE, Bronkhorst AW. Using neurophysiological signals that reflect cognitive or affective state: six recommendations to avoid common pitfalls. Front Neurosci. 2015;9:136. PubMed PMID: 25983676
40. Prust ML, Forman R, Ovbiagele B. Addressing disparities in the global epidemiology of stroke. Nature Reviews Neurology. 2024;20:207-21.
41. Wang Y, Nakanishi M, Zhang D. EEG-Based Brain- Computer Interfaces. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2019;1101:41-65.
42. Salbach NM, Mountain A, Lindsay MP, Blacquiere D, McGuff R, Foley N, et al. Canadian Stroke Best Practice Recommendations: Virtual Stroke Rehabilitation Interim Consensus Statement 2022. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2022;101:1076-82.
43. Li Y, Yi R, Hu Z. Brain-computer interface technology for motor rehabilitation in severe stroke: a narrative review. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2026;14:1822784. PubMed. PMID: 42158453
44. Su F, Xu W. Enhancing brain plasticity to promote stroke recovery. Front Neurol. 2020;11:554089. PubMed PMID: 33192987
45. Xiong F, Liao X, Xiao J, Bai X, Huang J, Zhang B, et al. Emerging limb rehabilitation therapy after post-stroke motor recovery. Front Aging Neurosci. 2022; 14:863379. PubMed PMID: 35401147
46. Vidaurre C, Irastorza-Landa N, Sarasola-Sanz A, Insausti-Delgado A, Ray AM, Bibián C, et al. Challenges of neural interfaces for stroke motor rehabilitation. Front Hum Neurosci. 2023;17:1070404. PubMed PMID: 37789905
47. Stein J. Motor recovery strategies after stroke. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2004;11:12-22.
48. Tseng KC, Wang L, Hsieh C, Wong AM. Portable robots for upper-limb rehabilitation after stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Med. 2024;56:2337735. PubMed PMID: 38640459
49. Elashmawi WH, Ayman A, Antoun M, Mohamed H, Mohamed SE, Amr H, Talaat Y, Ali A. A comprehensive review on brain–computer interface (BCI)-based machine and deep learning algorithms for stroke rehabilitation. Appl Sci. 2024;14:6347.
50. Qiu Y, Liu H, Zhao M. A review of brain–computer interface-based language decoding: From signal interpretation to intelligent communication. Appl Sci. 2025;15:392.
51. Saibene A, Caglioni M, Corchs S, Gasparini F. EEG-based BCIs on motor imagery paradigm using wearable technologies: a systematic review. Sensors (Basel). 2023;23:2798. PubMed PMID: 36905004
52. Tataranu LG, Rizea RE. Neuroplasticity and nervous system recovery: cellular mechanisms, therapeutic advances, and future prospects. Brain Sciences. 2025;15:400. PubMed PMID: 40309875
53. Lu G, Cai S, Shi Y, Zhu J, Jiang S, Liu S. Progress in the mechanism of recovery of motor function after stroke. Curr Neurovasc Res. 2025;22:267-75.
54. Cramer SC, Sur M, Dobkin BH, O’Brien C, Sanger TD, Trojanowski JQ, et al. Harnessing neuroplasticity for clinical applications. Brain. 2011;134:1591-609.
55. Chen Y, Peng Y, Tang J, Camilleri T, Camilleri K, Kong W, et al. EEG-based affective brain-computer interfaces: recent advancements and future challenges. J Neural Eng. 2025;22(3). PubMed PMID: 40490007
56. Wen D, Fan Y, Hsu SH, Xu J, Zhou Y, Tao J, et al. Combining brain–computer interface and virtual reality for rehabilitation in neurological diseases: A narrative review. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2021;64:101404. PubMed PMID: 32561504.
57. Herff C, Schultz T. Automatic speech recognition from neural signals: a focused review. Front Neurosci. 2016;10:429. PubMed PMID: 27729844
58. Tang S, Liang Y, Li Z. Mind wandering state detection during video-based learning via EEG. Front Hum Neurosci. 2023;17:1182319. PubMed PMID: 37323927
59. Behboodi A, Kline JE, Gravunder A, Phillips C, Parker SM, Damiano DL. Development and evaluation of a BCI-neurofeedback system with real-time EEG detection and electrical stimulation assistance during motor attempt for neurorehabilitation of children with cerebral palsy. Front Hum Neurosci. 2024;18: 1346050. PubMed PMID: 38633751
60. Yu S, Wang Z, Wang F, Chen K, Yao D, Xu P, et al. Multiclass classification of motor imagery tasks based on multi-branch convolutional neural network and temporal convolutional network model. Cerebral Cortex. 2024;34:bhad511. PubMed PMID: 38183186
61. Jin W, Zhu X, Qian L, Wu C, Yang F, Zhan D, Kang Z, Luo K, Meng D, Xu G. Electroencephalogram-based adaptive closed-loop brain-computer interface in neurorehabilitation: a review. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience. 2024;18:1431815. PubMed PMID: 39371523
62. Tai P, Ding P, Wang F, Gong A, Li T, Zhao L, Su L, Fu Y. Brain-computer interface paradigms and neural coding. Front Neurosci. 2024;17:1345961. PubMed PMID: 38287988
63. Omarov B, Narynov S, Zhumanov Z. Artificial intelligence-enabled chatbots in mental health: A systematic review. Comput Mater Contin. 2023; 74:5105-22.
64. Sharma P. Smart healthcare: the role of AI, robotics, and NLP in advancing telemedicine and remote patient monitoring. BMC Artificial Intelligence. 2025;1: 14.
65. Lance BJ, Kerick SE, Ries AJ, Oie KS, McDowell K. Brain-computer interface technologies in the coming decades. Proc IEEE. 2012;100(Special Centennial Issue):1585-99.
66. Ward N, Cohen LG. Mechanisms underlying recovery of motor function after stroke. Arch Neurol. 2004;61: 1844-8.
67. Raffin E, Hummel FC. Restoring motor functions after stroke: multiple approaches and opportunities. Neuroscientist. 2018;24:400-16.
68. Zhou M, Tu Y, Cui J, Gao P, Yi T, Wang J, Hao Q, Li H, Zhu T. Effect of constraint-induced movement therapy on lower extremity motor dysfunction in post-stroke patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Neurol. 2022;13:1028206. PubMed PMID: 36479056
69. Kaiser J, Kübler A, Hinterberger T, Neumann N, Birbaumer N. A non-invasive communication device for the paralyzed. min-Minimally Invasive Neurosurgery. 2002;45:19-23.
70. Fu J, Chen S, Jia J. Sensorimotor rhythm-based brain–computer interfaces for motor tasks used in hand upper extremity rehabilitation after stroke: a systematic review. Brain Sci. 2022;13:56. PubMed PMID: 36672038
71. Farwell LA, Donchin E. Talking off the top of your head: toward a mental prosthesis utilizing event-related brain potentials. Electroencephalography and clinical Neurophysiology. 1988;70:510-23.
72. Haruki Y, Yang Y, Suzuki K, Imamizu H, Ogawa K. Real-time fMRI neurofeedback boosts heartbeat perception by modulating insula activation pattern during interoceptive attention. Imaging Neurosci. 2025: 3:IMAG.a.142. PubMed PMID: 40937158
73. Pun TK, Khoshnevis M, Hosman T, Wilson GH, Kapitonava A, Kamdar F, et al. Measuring instability in chronic human intracortical neural recordings towards stable, long-term brain-computer interfaces. Commun Biol. 2024;7:1363. PubMed PMID: 39433844
74. Bensch M, Martens S, Halder S, Hill J, Nijboer F, Ramos A, Birbaumer N, Bogdan M, Kotchoubey B, Rosenstiel W, Schölkopf B. Assessing attention and cognitive function in completely locked-in state with event-related brain potentials and epidural electrocorticography. J Neural Eng. 2014;11:026006. PubMed PMID: 24556584
75. Dutta D, Sen S, Aruchamy S, Mandal S. Prevalence of post-stroke upper extremity paresis in developing countries and significance of m-Health for rehabilitation after stroke-A review. Smart Health. 2022;23: 100264.
76. Winstein CJ, Stein J, Arena R, Bates B, Cherney LR, Cramer SC, et al. Guidelines for Adult Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery: A Guideline for Healthcare Professionals From the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke. 2016;47: e98-e169.
77. Chew E, Teo WP, Tang N, Ang KK, Ng YS, Zhou JH, Teh I, Phua KS, Zhao L, Guan C. Using transcranial direct current stimulation to augment the effect of motor imagery-assisted brain-computer interface training in chronic stroke patients—cortical reorganization considerations. Front Neurol. 2020;11:948. PubMed PMID: 32973672
78. Cramer SC, Dodakian L, Le V, See J, Augsburger R, McKenzie A, et al. Efficacy of home-based telerehabilitation vs in-clinic therapy for adults after stroke. JAMA Neurol. 2019;76:1079-87.
79. Chung E, Lee BH, et al. Effects of brain-computer interface-based functional electrical stimulation on balance and gait function in patients with stroke. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27:513-6.
80. Rost NS, Brodtmann A, Pase MP, van Veluw SJ, Biffi A, Duering M, Hinman JD, Dichgans M. Post-stroke cognitive impairment and dementia. Circulation research. 2022;130:1252-71.
81. Chung E, Kim JH, Park DS, Lee BH. Effects of brain-computer interface-based functional electrical stimulation on brain activation in stroke patients: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27:559-62.
82. Kalaria RN, Ballard C. Stroke and cognition. Curr Atheroscler Rep. 2001;3:334-9.
83. Ang KK, Guan C, Chua KSG, Ang BT, Kuah CWK, Wang C, et al. Brain-computer interface-based robotic end effector system for wrist and hand rehabilitation: results of a three-armed randomized controlled trial for chronic stroke. Front Neuroeng. 2014;7:30. PubMed PMID: 25120465
84. Lim CG, Lee TS, Guan C, Fung DSS, Cheung YB, Teng SS, et al. A randomized controlled trial of a brain-computer interface based attention training program for ADHD. PLoS One. 2019;14:e0221968. PubMed PMID: 31112554
85. Jang YY, Kim TH, Lee BH. Effects of brain-computer interface‐controlled functional electrical stimulation training on shoulder subluxation for patients with stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Occup Ther Int. 2016;23:175-85.
86. Robinson RG, Jorge RE. Post-stroke depression: a review. Am J Psychiatry. 2016;173:221-31.
87. Smith B. Depression and motivation. Phenomenol Cogn Sci. 2013;12:615-35.
88. Jeyaraman M, Balaji S, Jeyaraman N, Yadav S. Unraveling the ethical enigma: artificial intelligence in healthcare. Cureus. 2023;15:e43262. PubMed PMID: 37692617
89. Singh P. Transforming healthcare through AI: enhancing patient outcomes and bridging accessibility gaps. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 2024; 4:220-32.
90. Bohr A, Memarzadeh K. The rise of artificial intelligence in healthcare applications. In: Bohr A, Memarzadeh K, editors. Artificial intelligence in healthcare. Cambridge (MA): Academic Press; 2020. p. 25-60.
91. Kauttonen J, Rousi R, Alamäki A. Trust and acceptance challenges in the adoption of AI applications in health care: quantitative survey analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2025;27:e65567. PubMed PMID: 40116853
92. Khalid U bint, Naeem M, Stasolla F, Syed M, Abbas M, Coronato A. Impact of AI-powered solutions in rehabilitation process: recent improvements and future trends. Int J Gen Med. 2024;17:943-69.
93. Wu D, Xu Y, Lu BL. Transfer learning for EEG-based brain–computer interfaces: A review of progress made since 2016. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems. 2020;14:4-19.
94. Mane R, Chouhan T, Guan C. BCI for stroke rehabilitation: motor and beyond. J Neural Eng. 2020;17:041001. PubMed PMID: 32613947
95. Mohan A, Knutson JS, Cunningham DA, Widina M, O’Laughlin K, Arora T, et al. Contralaterally controlled functional electrical stimulation combined with brain stimulation for severe upper limb hemiplegia-study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Front Neurol. 2022;13:869733. PubMed PMID: 35599736
96. Wang H, Xiong X, Zhang K, Wang X, Sun C, Zhu B, et al. Motor network reorganization after motor imagery training in stroke patients with moderate to severe upper limb impairment. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2023;29: 619-32.
97. Burke E, Cramer SC. Biomarkers and predictors of restorative therapy effects after stroke. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2013;13:329. PubMed PMID: 23299824
