EMG Pattern Recognition Control of the DEKA Arm: Impact on User Ratings of Satisfaction and Usability

Abstract

The DEKA Arm has multiple degrees of freedom which historically have been operated primarily by inertial measurement units (IMUs). However, the IMUs are not appropriate for all potential users; new control methods are needed. The purposes of this study were: 1) to describe usability and satisfaction of two controls methods—IMU and myoelectric pattern recognition (EMG-PR) controls—and 2) to compare ratings by control and amputation level. A total of 36 subjects with transradial (TR) or transhumeral (TH) amputation participated in the study. The subjects included 11 EMG-PR users (82% TR) and 25 IMU users (68% TR). The study consisted of in-laboratory training (Part A) and home use (Part B). The subjects were administered the Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience satisfaction scale and other usability and satisfaction measures. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests compared the differences by control type. The differences were compared for those who did and did not want a DEKA Arm. The preferences for features of the DEKA Arm were compared by control type. The comparisons revealed poorer ratings of skill, comfort, and weight among EMG-PR users. The TR amputees using IMUs rated usability more favorably. TH amputees rated usability similarly. The TR amputees using EMG-PR were less satisfied with weight, pinch grip, and wrist display, whereas the TH amputees were less satisfied with the full system, wires/cables, and battery. Usability and satisfaction declined after Part B for EMG-PR users. Overall, we found that the IMU users rated the DEKA Arm and the controls more favorably than the EMG-PR users. The findings indicate that the EMG-PR system we tested was less well accepted than the IMUs for control of the DEKA Arm.

A National Survey of Prosthesis Use in Veterans with Major Upper Limb Amputation: Comparisons by Gender

“…The survey also asked several investigator‐generated items including whether or not respondents needed help from another person to perform daily activities, and if so, the number of hours of help required in a typical day. For additional details about the survey, see Resnik et al 24 …”

Suitability of the Openly Accessible 3D Printed Prosthetic Hands for War-Wounded Children

“…As a baseline study, we investigated the body-powered 3D printed hands that were available online. Prosthetic hands that were controlled using pattern recognition of electromyographic (EMG) signals and other sensory feedback strategies were excluded in the investigation (Kuiken et al, 2016 ; Resnik et al, 2019 ).…”

Portable Take-Home System Enables Proportional Control and High-Resolution Data Logging With a Multi-Degree-of-Freedom Bionic Arm

“…Electromyography (EMG) from the residual forearm has been used to control commercially available and research-grade prosthetic arms (Kuiken et al, 2016 ; Hargrove et al, 2017 ; Ottobock, 2017 ; Touch Bionics Inc, 2017 ; Wendelken et al, 2017 ; George et al, 2018 ; Page et al, 2018 ; Perry et al, 2018 ; Mobius Bionics, 2020 ). Although research has demonstrated proportional control of multiple, independent degrees of freedom (DOFs) (Davis et al, 2016 ; George et al, 2018 ; Page et al, 2018 ), commercially available prostheses still suffer from a variety of limitations (Biddiss and Chau, 2007 ), including limited number of pre-determined grips (Touch Bionics Inc, 2017 ), temporal delay due to sequential inputs used to select grips (Ottobock, 2017 ; Mobius Bionics, 2020 ), fixed output force (e.g., from traditional classifier algorithms) (Resnik et al, 2018a ), extensive training that lasts days to weeks (Resnik et al, 2017 , 2018a , 2019 ), and non-intuitive methods of control [e.g., inertial measurement units (IMUs) on residual limb or feet] (Resnik et al, 2018b ; Mobius Bionics, 2020 ).…”