Archives of Plastic Surgery

Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Clinical outcomes of a low-cost single-channel myoelectric-interface three-dimensional hand prosthesis

  • Ku, Inhoe (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Gordon K. (Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford Medical Center) ;
  • Park, Chan Yong (Department of Trauma Surgery, Wonkwang University Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Janghyuk (Beauty Plastic Surgery Clinic) ;
  • Jeong, Euicheol (Department of Plastic Surgery, SMG-SNU Boramae Medical Center)
  • Received : 2018.11.21
  • Accepted : 2019.05.04
  • Published : 2019.07.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background Prosthetic hands with a myoelectric interface have recently received interest within the broader category of hand prostheses, but their high cost is a major barrier to use. Modern three-dimensional (3D) printing technology has enabled more widespread development and cost-effectiveness in the field of prostheses. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the clinical impact of a low-cost 3D-printed myoelectric-interface prosthetic hand on patients' daily life. Methods A prospective review of all upper-arm transradial amputation amputees who used 3D-printed myoelectric interface prostheses (Mark V) between January 2016 and August 2017 was conducted. The functional outcomes of prosthesis usage over a 3-month follow-up period were measured using a validated method (Orthotics Prosthetics User Survey-Upper Extremity Functional Status [OPUS-UEFS]). In addition, the correlation between the length of the amputated radius and changes in OPUS-UEFS scores was analyzed. Results Ten patients were included in the study. After use of the 3D-printed myoelectric single electromyography channel prosthesis for 3 months, the average OPUS-UEFS score significantly increased from 45.50 to 60.10. The Spearman correlation coefficient (r) of the correlation between radius length and OPUS-UEFS at the 3rd month of prosthetic use was 0.815. Conclusions This low-cost 3D-printed myoelectric-interface prosthetic hand with a single reliable myoelectrical signal shows the potential to positively impact amputees' quality of life through daily usage. The emergence of a low-cost 3D-printed myoelectric prosthesis could lead to new market trends, with such a device gaining popularity via reduced production costs and increased market demand.

Keywords

References

  1. Resnik L, Meucci MR, Lieberman-Klinger S, et al. Advanced upper limb prosthetic devices: implications for upper limb prosthetic rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012;93:710-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2011.11.010
  2. Ten Kate J, Smit G, Breedveld P. 3D-printed upper limb prostheses: a review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2017; 12:300-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2016.1253117
  3. Owings MF, Kozak LJ. Ambulatory and inpatient procedures in the United States, 1996. Vital Health Stat 13 1998; (139):1-119.
  4. Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, et al. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008;89:422-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.11.005
  5. Lake C. Partial hand amputation: prosthetic management. In: Smith DG, Michael JW, Bowker JH, editors. Atlas of amputations and limb deficiencies: surgical, prosthetic, and rehabilitation principles. 3rd ed. Rosemont: AAOS; 2004. p. 209-17.
  6. Zuo KJ, Olson JL. The evolution of functional hand replacement: from iron prostheses to hand transplantation. Plast Surg (Oakv) 2014;22:44-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/229255031402200111
  7. Behrend C, Reizner W, Marchessault JA, et al. Update on advances in upper extremity prosthetics. J Hand Surg Am 2011;36:1711-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2011.07.024
  8. London BM, Jordan LR, Jackson CR, et al. Electrical stimulation of the proprioceptive cortex (Area 3a) used to instruct a behaving monkey. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2008;16:32-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2007.907544
  9. Morgan EN, Kyle Potter B, Souza JM, et al. Targeted muscle reinnervation for transradial amputation: description of operative technique. Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg 2016;20: 166-71. https://doi.org/10.1097/BTH.0000000000000141
  10. Vujaklija I, Farina D, Aszmann OC. New developments in prosthetic arm systems. Orthop Res Rev 2016;8:31-9.
  11. van der Riet D, Stopforth R, Bright G, et al. An overview and comparison of upper limb prosthetics. Presented at the 2013 Africon; 2013. p. 1-8.
  12. Arya S, Binney Z, Khakharia A, et al. Race and socioeconomic status independently affect risk of major amputation in peripheral artery disease. J Am Heart Assoc 2018;7: e007425. https://doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.117.007425
  13. Merrill DR, Lockhart J, Troyk PR, et al. Development of an implantable myoelectric sensor for advanced prosthesis control. Artif Organs 2011;35:249-52. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1594.2011.01219.x
  14. Gretsch KF, Lather HD, Peddada KV, et al. Development of novel 3D-printed robotic prosthetic for transradial amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int 2016;40:400-3. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364615579317
  15. Yoshikawa M, Sato R, Higashihara T, et al. Rehand: realistic electric prosthetic hand created with a 3D printer. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2015;2015:2470-3.
  16. Lindner HY, Natterlund BS, Hermansson LM. Upper limb prosthetic outcome measures: review and content comparison based on International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Prosthet Orthot Int 2010;34:109-28. https://doi.org/10.3109/03093641003776976
  17. Burger H, Franchignoni F, Heinemann AW, et al. Validation of the orthotics and prosthetics user survey upper extremity functional status module in people with unilateral upper limb amputation. J Rehabil Med 2008;40:393-9. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0183
  18. Probsting E, Kannenberg A, Conyers D, et al. Ease of activities of daily living with conventional and multigrip myoelectric hands. J Prosthet Orthot 2015;27:46-52. https://doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0000000000000058
  19. Zuniga JM, Peck JL, Srivastava R, et al. Functional changes through the usage of 3D-printed transitional prostheses in children. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2019;14:68-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2017.1398279
  20. Napier JR. The prehensile movements of the human hand. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1956;38-B:902-13. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.38B4.902
  21. Flatt AE. Grasp. Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) 2000;13:343-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2000.11927702
  22. Kannenberg A, Zacharias B. Difficulty of performing activities of daily living with the Michelangelo Multigrip and traditional myoelectric hands. Presented at the American Academy of Orthotists & Prosthetists 40th Academy Annual Meeting & Scientific Symposium; 2014. FPTH142014.
  23. Ovadia SA, Askari M. Upper extremity amputations and prosthetics. Semin Plast Surg 2015;29:55-61. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1544171
  24. Fallahian N, Saeedi H, Mokhtarinia H, et al. Sensory feedback add-on for upper-limb prostheses. Prosthet Orthot Int 2017;41:314-7. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364616677653

Cited by

  1. Additive manufacturing pertaining to bone: Hopes, reality and future challenges for clinical applications vol.121, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2020.11.039
  2. 3D Origami Sensing Robots for Cooperative Healthcare Monitoring vol.6, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1002/admt.202000938
  3. Surgical and technological advances in the management of upper limb amputees vol.b103, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.103b3.bjj-2020-1184.r1
  4. New Frontiers in 3D Structural Sensing Robots vol.33, pp.19, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202002534
  5. Design, Construction and Tests of a Low-Cost Myoelectric Thumb vol.9, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies9030063