Systematic Review of Measures of Impairment and Activity Limitation for Persons With Upper Limb Trauma and Amputation

Resnik, Linda; Borgia, Matt; Silver, Benjamin; Cancio, Jill M.

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2017.01.015

Cited by 33 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 277 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[ 10 , 14 ] The OPUS UEFS is the only self-report measure of activity performance developed specifically for adults with upper limb amputation. [ 26 ] It is a self-report measure of difficulty performing and ease of performing 23 every day activities self-care and IADL tasks [ 10 , 14 ]. The tasks are rated on a 1–5 point scale (very easy to cannot perform activity), regardless of how the activities are performed (with or without a prosthesis).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do the outcomes of the DEKA Arm compare to conventional prostheses?

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesObjectives were to 1) compare self-reported function, dexterity, activity performance, quality of life and community integration of the DEKA Arm to conventional prostheses; and 2) examine differences in outcomes by conventional prosthesis type, terminal device type and by DEKA Arm configuration level.MethodsThis was a two-part study; Part A consisted of in-laboratory training. Part B consisted of home use. Study participants were 23 prosthesis users (mean age = 45 ± 16; 87% male) who completed Part A, and 15 (mean age = 45 ± 18; 87% male) who completed Parts A and B. Outcomes including self-report and performance measures, were collected at Baseline using participants’ personal prostheses and at the End of Parts A and B. Scores were compared using paired t-tests. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to compare outcomes for the full sample, and for the sample stratified by device and terminal device type. Analysis of outcomes by configuration level was performed graphically.ResultsAt the End of Part A activity performance using the DEKA Arm and conventional prosthesis was equivalent, but slower with the DEKA Arm. After Part B, performance using the DEKA Arm surpassed conventional prosthesis scores, and speed of activity completion was equivalent. Participants reported using the DEKA Arm to perform more activities, had less perceived disability, and less difficulty in activities at the End of A and B as compared to Baseline. No differences were observed in dexterity, prosthetic skill, spontaneity, pain, community integration or quality of life. Comparisons stratified by device type revealed similar patterns. Graphic comparisons revealed variations by configuration level.ConclusionParticipants using the DEKA Arm had less perceived disability and more engagement of the prosthesis in everyday tasks, although activity performance was slower. After home use experience, activity performance was improved and activity speed equivalent to using conventional prostheses.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

How do the outcomes of the DEKA Arm compare to conventional prostheses?

et al. 2018

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The prosthesis design was assessed using the Box and Blocks Test (BBT) 25 and the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP) test, 26 which are well-established tests for evaluating prosthetic designs with prosthetic users. 27,28 The BBT consists of 25-mm wooden square cubes and a container separated in two areas by a wall in the middle. The subject must transfer as many blocks as possible from one area into the other.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Functional evaluation of a non-assembly 3D-printed hand prosthesis

Cuellar

Smit

Breedveld

et al. 2019

Proc Inst Mech Eng H

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In developing countries, the access of amputees to prosthetic devices is very limited. In a way to increase accessibility of prosthetic hands, we have recently developed a new approach for the design and 3D printing of non-assembly active hand prostheses using inexpensive 3D printers working on the basis of material extrusion technology. This article describes the design of our novel 3D-printed hand prosthesis and also shows the mechanical and functional evaluation in view of its future use in developing countries. We have fabricated a hand prosthesis using 3D printing technology and a non-assembly design approach that reaches certain level of functionality. The mechanical resistance of critical parts, the mechanical performance, and the functionality of a non-assembly 3D-printed hand prosthesis were assessed. The mechanical configuration used in the hand prosthesis is able to withstand typical actuation forces delivered by prosthetic users. Moreover, the activation forces and the energy required for a closing cycle are considerably lower as compared to other body-powered prostheses. The non-assembly design achieved a comparable level of functionality with respect to other body-powered alternatives. We consider this prosthetic hand a valuable option for people with arm defects in developing countries.

show abstract

“…Functionality tests were employed for comparative analysis of MPR and direct control approaches through an objective evaluation. The literature revealed several adequate assessment tools [26] , [27] , such as, the Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control (ACMC) [28] , the Activities Measure for Upper Limb Amputees [29] , the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure [30] , and the University of New Brunswick Test [31] . Given its high validity and easy accessibility, the ACMC was deemed as the most appropriate test in this study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Alternative Myoelectric Pattern Recognition Approach for the Control of Hand Prostheses: A Case Study of Use in Daily Life by a Dysmelia Subject

Mastinu¹,

Ahlberg²,

Lendaro³

et al. 2018

IEEE J. Transl. Eng. Health Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The functionality of upper limb prostheses can be improved by intuitive control strategies that use bioelectric signals measured at the stump level. One such strategy is the decoding of motor volition via myoelectric pattern recognition (MPR), which has shown promising results in controlled environments and more recently in clinical practice. Moreover, not much has been reported about daily life implementation and real-time accuracy of these decoding algorithms. This paper introduces an alternative approach in which MPR allows intuitive control of four different grips and open/close in a multifunctional prosthetic hand. We conducted a clinical proof-of-concept in activities of daily life by constructing a self-contained, MPR-controlled, transradial prosthetic system provided with a novel user interface meant to log errors during real-time operation. The system was used for five days by a unilateral dysmelia subject whose hand had never developed, and who nevertheless learned to generate patterns of myoelectric activity, reported as intuitive, for multi-functional prosthetic control. The subject was instructed to manually log errors when they occurred via the user interface mounted on the prosthesis. This allowed the collection of information about prosthesis usage and real-time classification accuracy. The assessment of capacity for myoelectric control test was used to compare the proposed approach to the conventional prosthetic control approach, direct control. Regarding the MPR approach, the subject reported a more intuitive control when selecting the different grips, but also a higher uncertainty during proportional continuous movements. This paper represents an alternative to the conventional use of MPR, and this alternative may be particularly suitable for a certain type of amputee patients. Moreover, it represents a further validation of MPR with dysmelia cases.

show abstract

Systematic Review of Measures of Impairment and Activity Limitation for Persons With Upper Limb Trauma and Amputation

Cited by 33 publications

References 277 publications

How do the outcomes of the DEKA Arm compare to conventional prostheses?

How do the outcomes of the DEKA Arm compare to conventional prostheses?

Functional evaluation of a non-assembly 3D-printed hand prosthesis

An Alternative Myoelectric Pattern Recognition Approach for the Control of Hand Prostheses: A Case Study of Use in Daily Life by a Dysmelia Subject

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About