Differences in Two Multiarticulating Myoelectric Hands for Facilitating Activities of Daily Living in Individuals with Transradial Amputation: A Cross-Sectional Study
A. Kannenberg, Russell L Lundstrom, K. Hibler, Shawn Swanson Johnson
{"title":"Differences in Two Multiarticulating Myoelectric Hands for Facilitating Activities of Daily Living in Individuals with Transradial Amputation: A Cross-Sectional Study","authors":"A. Kannenberg, Russell L Lundstrom, K. Hibler, Shawn Swanson Johnson","doi":"10.1097/JPO.0000000000000411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Introduction Research with multiarticulating prosthetic hands on patient-reported ease of activities of daily living (ADLs) and usefulness is still limited. This study aimed at comparing ease of ADL performance and usefulness of two common multiarticulating prosthetic hands. Methods Twenty subjects with transradial amputation wearing the bebionic (n = 10) or i-Limb (n = 10) hands were assessed with a hybrid Orthotics and Prosthetics User Survey–Upper Extremity Functional Status (OPUS-UEFS)/Prosthetic Upper Extremity Functional Index (PUFI) outcome measure previously used in a study with another multigrip prosthetic hand. Results There were no significant differences between the bebionic and i-Limb hands. However, the analysis of individual activities revealed that each multiarticulating hand had specific strengths and weaknesses compared with a historic control group with conventional myoelectric hands. Discussion Both multiarticulating hands may improve ease of performing ADLs compared with conventional myoelectric hands. However, more grip types available do not necessarily result in greater ease or usefulness compared with advanced hands with fewer grip types. Conclusions Clinicians must match the patients' functional needs with the differential functional profiles of the available multiarticulating hands. Clinical Relevance The present study is the first to provide comparative patient-reported outcomes on 3 multigrip prosthetic hands as well as standard myoelectric hands in 23 common ADLs. The distinct patient-reported ease and usefulness profiles of the different hands may inform and support clinicians' decision-making on hand selection for individual patients with transradial amputation.","PeriodicalId":53702,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics","volume":"35 1","pages":"38 - 43"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0000000000000411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT Introduction Research with multiarticulating prosthetic hands on patient-reported ease of activities of daily living (ADLs) and usefulness is still limited. This study aimed at comparing ease of ADL performance and usefulness of two common multiarticulating prosthetic hands. Methods Twenty subjects with transradial amputation wearing the bebionic (n = 10) or i-Limb (n = 10) hands were assessed with a hybrid Orthotics and Prosthetics User Survey–Upper Extremity Functional Status (OPUS-UEFS)/Prosthetic Upper Extremity Functional Index (PUFI) outcome measure previously used in a study with another multigrip prosthetic hand. Results There were no significant differences between the bebionic and i-Limb hands. However, the analysis of individual activities revealed that each multiarticulating hand had specific strengths and weaknesses compared with a historic control group with conventional myoelectric hands. Discussion Both multiarticulating hands may improve ease of performing ADLs compared with conventional myoelectric hands. However, more grip types available do not necessarily result in greater ease or usefulness compared with advanced hands with fewer grip types. Conclusions Clinicians must match the patients' functional needs with the differential functional profiles of the available multiarticulating hands. Clinical Relevance The present study is the first to provide comparative patient-reported outcomes on 3 multigrip prosthetic hands as well as standard myoelectric hands in 23 common ADLs. The distinct patient-reported ease and usefulness profiles of the different hands may inform and support clinicians' decision-making on hand selection for individual patients with transradial amputation.
期刊介绍:
Published quarterly by the AAOP, JPO: Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics provides information on new devices, fitting and fabrication techniques, and patient management experiences. The focus is on prosthetics and orthotics, with timely reports from related fields such as orthopaedic research, occupational therapy, physical therapy, orthopaedic surgery, amputation surgery, physical medicine, biomedical engineering, psychology, ethics, and gait analysis. Each issue contains research-based articles reviewed and approved by a highly qualified editorial board and an Academy self-study quiz offering two PCE''s.