USER EXPERIENCES WITH TRADITIONAL AND 3D-PRINTED UPPER EXTREMITY PROSTHESES, DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY INSTRUMENT

Jennifer Mankoff, Saiph Savage, S. Eckert, C. Ngo, G. Fiedler
{"title":"USER EXPERIENCES WITH TRADITIONAL AND 3D-PRINTED UPPER EXTREMITY PROSTHESES, DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY INSTRUMENT","authors":"Jennifer Mankoff, Saiph Savage, S. Eckert, C. Ngo, G. Fiedler","doi":"10.33137/CPOJ.V1I2.32009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION \nAdditive Manufacturing (AM), colloquial known as 3D-printing, has been deemed capable to revolutionize a great number of industries, including the Health Care industry.1 In the field of upper limb prosthetics, it has been attempted to leverage the potential advantages of AM, such as crowd based design optimization, infrastructure independent fabrication, and economical material use, in the interest of providing low-cost, readily available devices to recipients whose needs were only insufficiently met by traditional approaches of device prescription and fitting. While the popular media has been quick to emphasize the potential – perceived or real – of 3D printed prostheses, clinicians have generally been less euphoric and the base of scientific evidence on questions related to these applications has been small.2 As with most research endeavors in prosthetics and orthotics, recruiting sufficient sample sizes to allow solid conclusions is a perennial challenge also in this sub-field. As a consequence, the effectiveness of the many 3D-printed upper limb devices made by volunteers of the E-nable community (Fig.1) is yet to be determined. Self-reported outcome assessment tools can somewhat mitigate the issue of low sample sizes. However, none have been applied to a wider range of device classes, to allow comparative analyses across those. We describe the development and preliminary testing of an online based survey tool to generate comparison outcome data for a wide variety of upper limb prosthetics devices, including varieties that are 3D-printed by hobbyists. \nAbstract PDF  Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/32009/24428 \nHow to cite: Mankoff  J, Savage S, Eckert S, Ngo C, Fiedler G. USER EXPERIENCES WITH TRADITIONAL AND 3D-PRINTED UPPER EXTREMITY PROSTHESES, DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY INSTRUMENT. CANADIAN PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS JOURNAL, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 2, 2018; ABSTRACT, POSTER PRESENTATION AT THE AOPA’S 101ST NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, SEPT. 26-29, VANCOUVER, CANADA, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v1i2.32009                                                                            \nAbstracts were Peer-reviewed by the American Orthotic Prosthetic Association (AOPA) 101st National Assembly Scientific Committee.  \nhttp://www.aopanet.org/ \n ","PeriodicalId":32763,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Prosthetics Orthotics Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Prosthetics Orthotics Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33137/CPOJ.V1I2.32009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Additive Manufacturing (AM), colloquial known as 3D-printing, has been deemed capable to revolutionize a great number of industries, including the Health Care industry.1 In the field of upper limb prosthetics, it has been attempted to leverage the potential advantages of AM, such as crowd based design optimization, infrastructure independent fabrication, and economical material use, in the interest of providing low-cost, readily available devices to recipients whose needs were only insufficiently met by traditional approaches of device prescription and fitting. While the popular media has been quick to emphasize the potential – perceived or real – of 3D printed prostheses, clinicians have generally been less euphoric and the base of scientific evidence on questions related to these applications has been small.2 As with most research endeavors in prosthetics and orthotics, recruiting sufficient sample sizes to allow solid conclusions is a perennial challenge also in this sub-field. As a consequence, the effectiveness of the many 3D-printed upper limb devices made by volunteers of the E-nable community (Fig.1) is yet to be determined. Self-reported outcome assessment tools can somewhat mitigate the issue of low sample sizes. However, none have been applied to a wider range of device classes, to allow comparative analyses across those. We describe the development and preliminary testing of an online based survey tool to generate comparison outcome data for a wide variety of upper limb prosthetics devices, including varieties that are 3D-printed by hobbyists. Abstract PDF  Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/32009/24428 How to cite: Mankoff  J, Savage S, Eckert S, Ngo C, Fiedler G. USER EXPERIENCES WITH TRADITIONAL AND 3D-PRINTED UPPER EXTREMITY PROSTHESES, DEVELOPMENT OF A COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY INSTRUMENT. CANADIAN PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS JOURNAL, VOLUME 1, ISSUE 2, 2018; ABSTRACT, POSTER PRESENTATION AT THE AOPA’S 101ST NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, SEPT. 26-29, VANCOUVER, CANADA, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v1i2.32009                                                                            Abstracts were Peer-reviewed by the American Orthotic Prosthetic Association (AOPA) 101st National Assembly Scientific Committee.  http://www.aopanet.org/  
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
传统和3d打印上肢假肢的用户体验,综合测量仪器的开发
简介增材制造(AM),俗称3D打印,被认为能够彻底改变包括医疗保健行业在内的许多行业。1在上肢假肢领域,人们试图利用AM的潜在优势,如基于人群的设计优化、独立于基础设施的制造和经济的材料使用,为了向那些传统的设备处方和安装方法无法充分满足需求的接受者提供低成本、易于获得的设备。虽然流行媒体很快就强调了3D打印假肢的潜力——感知的或真实的——但临床医生通常不那么高兴,而且与这些应用相关的问题的科学证据基础也很小。2与假肢和矫形器的大多数研究工作一样,在这个子领域,招募足够的样本量以得出可靠的结论也是一个长期的挑战。因此,E-nable社区志愿者制作的许多3D打印上肢设备(图1)的有效性尚待确定。自我报告的结果评估工具可以在一定程度上缓解低样本量的问题。然而,没有一个应用于更广泛的设备类别,以便对这些类别进行比较分析。我们描述了一种基于在线的调查工具的开发和初步测试,该工具用于生成各种上肢假肢设备的比较结果数据,包括爱好者3D打印的各种设备。摘要PDF链接:https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/32009/24428如何引用:Mankoff J,Savage S,Eckert S,Ngo C,Fiedler G.用户对传统和3D设计的上极限产品的体验,综合测量仪器的开发。《加拿大假肢与矫形学杂志》,2018年第2期,第1卷;摘要,2018年9月26日至29日在加拿大温哥华举行的AOPA第101届国民大会上的海报展示。DOI:https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v1i2.32009摘要由美国矫形修复协会(AOPA)第101届国民议会科学委员会进行同行评审。http://www.aopanet.org/
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Canadian Prosthetics  Orthotics Journal
Canadian Prosthetics Orthotics Journal Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Exploring the need for lower limb prosthetic guidelines in South Africa's private healthcare sector. Development and evaluation of an anteriorly mounted microprocessor-controlled powered hip joint prosthesis. Prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal disorders among Iranian orthotists and prosthetists: A study on work-related quality of life. Prosthetist Knowledge and 3D Printing. Overcoming barriers to cycling for knee disarticulation and transfemoral prosthesis users: A pilot study in The Netherlands.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1