Does Sensory Feedback in Prosthetic Hands Provide Functional Benefits in Daily Activities of Amputees?

Marković, Marko; Engels, Leonard F.; Schweisfurth, Meike A.; Došen, Strahinja; Wüstefeld, Daniela; Farina, Dario

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46669-9_97

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When naive prosthesis users (ablebodied) learned to control a myoelectric prosthesis, they showed relative good skills also without added feedback, just learning the muscle control needed for controlling the EMG-electrodes. However, when adding feedback sources, such as sound and vision, there was an improvement of the control (Markovic et al, 2018b). Similar results were shown in amputees, where task performance improved only by learning motor control.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…However, to execute a voluntary movement and to learn how to improve performance, several senses can be used. For example, amputees with myoelectric prostheses often use audio information from the motor of the prosthesis to help adjust the grip (Markovic et al, 2018b). Amputees also get some useful sensory information through vibrations in the socket when using the grip (Childress, 1980).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sensory Feedback in Hand Prostheses: A Prospective Study of Everyday Use

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Sensory feedback in hand prostheses is lacking but wished for. Many amputees experience a phantom hand map on their residual forearm. When the phantom hand map is touched, it is experienced as touch on the amputated hand. A non-invasive sensory feedback system, applicable to existing hand prostheses, can transfer somatotopical sensory information via phantom hand map. The aim was to evaluate how forearm amputees experienced a non-invasive sensory feedback system used in daily life over a 4-week period. Methods This longitudinal cohort study included seven forearm amputees. A non-invasive sensory feedback system was used over 4 weeks. For analysis, a mixed method was used, including quantitative tests (ACMC, proprioceptive pointing task, questionnaire) and interviews. A directed content analysis with predefined categories sensory feedback from the prosthesis, agency, body ownership, performance in activity , and suggestions for improvements was applied. Results The results from interviews showed that sensory feedback was experienced as a feeling of touch which contributed to an experience of completeness. However, the results from the questionnaire showed that the sense of agency and performance remained unchanged or deteriorated. The ability to feel and manipulate small objects was difficult and a stronger feedback was wished for. Phantom pain was alleviated in four out of five patients. Conclusion This is the first time a non-invasive sensory feedback system for hand prostheses was implemented in the home environment. The qualitative and quantitative results diverged. The sensory feedback was experienced as a feeling of touch which contributed to a feeling of completeness, linked to body ownership. The qualitative result was not verified in the quantitative measurements. Clinical Trial Registration Name: Evaluation of a Non-invasive Sensory Feedback System in Hand Prostheses. Date of registration: March 15, 2019. Date the first participant was enrolled: April 1, 2015. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03876405 ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4140-7478 .

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensory Feedback in Hand Prostheses: A Prospective Study of Everyday Use

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We initially chose to use vibrotactile feedback because we could vary the feedback signal continuously, matching the continuous gradient signal of the contact-location sensor. In addition, vibrotactile feedback has been shown to be beneficial in prostheses [20]- [22] and is low-cost, low-weight, discreet, and easy to implement. However, future investigations should also consider other forms of haptic feedback for contact location, such as distributed pressure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sensorimotor-inspired Tactile Feedback and Control Improve Consistency of Prosthesis Manipulation in the Absence of Direct Vision

Thomas¹,

Fazlollahi²,

Brown³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lack of haptically aware upper-limb prostheses forces amputees to rely largely on visual cues to complete activities of daily living. In contrast, able-bodied individuals inherently rely on conscious haptic perception and automatic tactile reflexes to govern volitional actions in situations that do not allow for constant visual attention. We therefore propose a myoelectric prosthesis system that reflects these concepts to aid manipulation performance without direct vision. To implement this design, we built two fabric-based tactile sensors that measure contact location along the palmar and dorsal sides of the prosthetic fingers and grasp pressure at the tip of the prosthetic thumb. Inspired by the natural sensorimotor system, we use the measurements from these sensors to provide vibrotactile feedback of contact location and implement a tactile grasp controller that uses automatic reflexes to prevent overgrasping and object slip. We compare this system to a standard myoelectric prosthesis in a challenging reach-to-pick-and-place task conducted without direct vision; 17 able-bodied adults took part in this single-session between-subjects study. Participants in the tactile group achieved more consistent high performance compared to participants in the standard group. These results indicate that the addition of contact-location feedback and reflex control increases the consistency with which objects can be grasped and moved without direct vision in upper-limb prosthetics.

show abstract