Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Case-study of a user-driven prosthetic arm design: bionic hand versus customized body-powered technology in a highly demanding work environment


Schweitzer, Wolf; Thali, Michael J; Egger, David (2018). Case-study of a user-driven prosthetic arm design: bionic hand versus customized body-powered technology in a highly demanding work environment. Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation (JNER), 15(1):1.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic arm research predominantly focuses on "bionic" but not body-powered arms. However, any research orientation along user needs requires sufficiently precise workplace specifications and sufficiently hard testing. Forensic medicine is a demanding environment, also physically, also for non-disabled people, on several dimensions (e.g., distances, weights, size, temperature, time). METHODS: As unilateral below elbow amputee user, the first author is in a unique position to provide direct comparison of a "bionic" myoelectric iLimb Revolution (Touch Bionics) and a customized body-powered arm which contains a number of new developments initiated or developed by the user: (1) quick lock steel wrist unit; (2) cable mount modification; (3) cast shape modeled shoulder anchor; (4) suspension with a soft double layer liner (Ohio Willowwood) and tube gauze (Molnlycke) combination. The iLimb is mounted on an epoxy socket; a lanyard fixed liner (Ohio Willowwood) contains magnetic electrodes (Liberating Technologies). An on the job usage of five years was supplemented with dedicated and focused intensive two-week use tests at work for both systems. RESULTS: The side-by-side comparison showed that the customized body-powered arm provides reliable, comfortable, effective, powerful as well as subtle service with minimal maintenance; most notably, grip reliability, grip force regulation, grip performance, center of balance, component wear down, sweat/temperature independence and skin state are good whereas the iLimb system exhibited a number of relevant serious constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Research and development of functional prostheses may want to focus on body-powered technology as it already performs on manually demanding and heavy jobs whereas eliminating myoelectric technology's constraints seems out of reach. Relevant testing could be developed to help expediting this. This is relevant as Swiss disability insurance specifically supports prostheses that enable actual work integration. Myoelectric and cosmetic arm improvement may benefit from a less forgiving focus on perfecting anthropomorphic appearance.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic arm research predominantly focuses on "bionic" but not body-powered arms. However, any research orientation along user needs requires sufficiently precise workplace specifications and sufficiently hard testing. Forensic medicine is a demanding environment, also physically, also for non-disabled people, on several dimensions (e.g., distances, weights, size, temperature, time). METHODS: As unilateral below elbow amputee user, the first author is in a unique position to provide direct comparison of a "bionic" myoelectric iLimb Revolution (Touch Bionics) and a customized body-powered arm which contains a number of new developments initiated or developed by the user: (1) quick lock steel wrist unit; (2) cable mount modification; (3) cast shape modeled shoulder anchor; (4) suspension with a soft double layer liner (Ohio Willowwood) and tube gauze (Molnlycke) combination. The iLimb is mounted on an epoxy socket; a lanyard fixed liner (Ohio Willowwood) contains magnetic electrodes (Liberating Technologies). An on the job usage of five years was supplemented with dedicated and focused intensive two-week use tests at work for both systems. RESULTS: The side-by-side comparison showed that the customized body-powered arm provides reliable, comfortable, effective, powerful as well as subtle service with minimal maintenance; most notably, grip reliability, grip force regulation, grip performance, center of balance, component wear down, sweat/temperature independence and skin state are good whereas the iLimb system exhibited a number of relevant serious constraints. CONCLUSIONS: Research and development of functional prostheses may want to focus on body-powered technology as it already performs on manually demanding and heavy jobs whereas eliminating myoelectric technology's constraints seems out of reach. Relevant testing could be developed to help expediting this. This is relevant as Swiss disability insurance specifically supports prostheses that enable actual work integration. Myoelectric and cosmetic arm improvement may benefit from a less forgiving focus on perfecting anthropomorphic appearance.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
1 citation in Web of Science®
2 citations in Scopus®
2 citations in Microsoft Academic
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

15 downloads since deposited on 23 Feb 2018
15 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Institute of Legal Medicine
Dewey Decimal Classification:340 Law
610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:2018
Deposited On:23 Feb 2018 08:16
Last Modified:19 Aug 2018 14:12
Publisher:BioMed Central
ISSN:1743-0003
OA Status:Gold
Free access at:PubMed ID. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-017-0340-0
Official URL:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5751817/
PubMed ID:29298708
Project Information:
  • : FunderFP7
  • : Grant ID207643
  • : Project TitleADDRESS - Active Distribution networks with full integration of Demand and distributed energy RESourceS

Download

Download PDF  'Case-study of a user-driven prosthetic arm design: bionic hand versus customized body-powered technology in a highly demanding work environment'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Language: English
Filetype: PDF
Size: 4MB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)