TY - JOUR
T1 - Functional assessment of current upper limb prostheses
T2 - An integrated clinical and technological perspective
AU - Capsi-Morales, Patricia
AU - Piazza, Cristina
AU - Sjoberg, Lis
AU - Catalano, Manuel G.
AU - Grioli, Giorgio
AU - Bicchi, Antonio
AU - Hermansson, Liselotte M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Capsi-Morales et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2023/8
Y1 - 2023/8
N2 - Although recent technological developments in the field of bionic upper limb prostheses, their rejection rate remains excessively high. The reasons are diverse (e.g. lack of functionality, control complexity, and comfortability) and most of these are reported only through self-rated questionnaires. Indeed, there is no quantitative evaluation of the extent to which a novel prosthetic solution can effectively address users’ needs compared to other technologies. This manuscript discusses the challenges and limitations of current upper limb prosthetic devices and evaluates their functionality through a standard functional assessment, the Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control (ACMC). To include a good representation of technologies, the authors collect information from participants in the Cybathlon Powered Arm Prostheses Race 2016 and 2020. The article analyzes 7 hour and 41 min of video footage to evaluate the performance of different prosthetic devices in various tasks inspired by activities of daily living (ADL). The results show that commercially-available rigid hands perform well in dexterous grasping, while body-powered solutions are more reliable and convenient for competitive environments. The article also highlights the importance of wrist design and control modality for successful execution of ADL. Moreover, we discuss the limitations of the evaluation methodology and suggest improvements for future assessments. With regard to future development, this work highlights the need for research in intuitive control of multiple degrees of freedom, adaptive solutions, and the integration of sensory feedback.
AB - Although recent technological developments in the field of bionic upper limb prostheses, their rejection rate remains excessively high. The reasons are diverse (e.g. lack of functionality, control complexity, and comfortability) and most of these are reported only through self-rated questionnaires. Indeed, there is no quantitative evaluation of the extent to which a novel prosthetic solution can effectively address users’ needs compared to other technologies. This manuscript discusses the challenges and limitations of current upper limb prosthetic devices and evaluates their functionality through a standard functional assessment, the Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control (ACMC). To include a good representation of technologies, the authors collect information from participants in the Cybathlon Powered Arm Prostheses Race 2016 and 2020. The article analyzes 7 hour and 41 min of video footage to evaluate the performance of different prosthetic devices in various tasks inspired by activities of daily living (ADL). The results show that commercially-available rigid hands perform well in dexterous grasping, while body-powered solutions are more reliable and convenient for competitive environments. The article also highlights the importance of wrist design and control modality for successful execution of ADL. Moreover, we discuss the limitations of the evaluation methodology and suggest improvements for future assessments. With regard to future development, this work highlights the need for research in intuitive control of multiple degrees of freedom, adaptive solutions, and the integration of sensory feedback.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85168252861&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0289978
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0289978
M3 - Article
C2 - 37585427
AN - SCOPUS:85168252861
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 18
JO - PLoS ONE
JF - PLoS ONE
IS - 8 August
M1 - e0289978
ER -