» Articles » PMID: 25102286

First-in-man Demonstration of a Fully Implanted Myoelectric Sensors System to Control an Advanced Electromechanical Prosthetic Hand

Overview
Specialty Neurology
Date 2014 Aug 8
PMID 25102286
Citations 56
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Advanced motorized prosthetic devices are currently controlled by EMG signals generated by residual muscles and recorded by surface electrodes on the skin. These surface recordings are often inconsistent and unreliable, leading to high prosthetic abandonment rates for individuals with upper limb amputation. Surface electrodes are limited because of poor skin contact, socket rotation, residual limb sweating, and their ability to only record signals from superficial muscles, whose function frequently does not relate to the intended prosthetic function. More sophisticated prosthetic devices require a stable and reliable interface between the user and robotic hand to improve upper limb prosthetic function.

New Method: Implantable Myoelectric Sensors (IMES(®)) are small electrodes intended to detect and wirelessly transmit EMG signals to an electromechanical prosthetic hand via an electro-magnetic coil built into the prosthetic socket. This system is designed to simultaneously capture EMG signals from multiple residual limb muscles, allowing the natural control of multiple degrees of freedom simultaneously.

Results: We report the status of the first FDA-approved clinical trial of the IMES(®) System. This study is currently in progress, limiting reporting to only preliminary results.

Comparison With Existing Methods: Our first subject has reported the ability to accomplish a greater variety and complexity of tasks in his everyday life compared to what could be achieved with his previous myoelectric prosthesis.

Conclusion: The interim results of this study indicate the feasibility of utilizing IMES(®) technology to reliably sense and wirelessly transmit EMG signals from residual muscles to intuitively control a three degree-of-freedom prosthetic arm.

Citing Articles

The Latest Research Progress on Bionic Artificial Hands: A Systematic Review.

Guo K, Lu J, Wu Y, Hu X, Yang H Micromachines (Basel). 2024; 15(7).

PMID: 39064402 PMC: 11278702. DOI: 10.3390/mi15070891.


Emerging Medical Technologies and Their Use in Bionic Repair and Human Augmentation.

Manero A, Rivera V, Fu Q, Schwartzman J, Prock-Gibbs H, Shah N Bioengineering (Basel). 2024; 11(7).

PMID: 39061777 PMC: 11274085. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering11070695.


[Prosthetic Fitting Concepts after Major Amputation in the Upper Limb - an Overview of Current Possibilities].

Harnoncourt L, Gstoettner C, Laengle G, Boesendorfer A, Aszmann O Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2024; 56(1):84-92.

PMID: 38417811 PMC: 10954373. DOI: 10.1055/a-2260-9842.


Neuromorphic hardware for somatosensory neuroprostheses.

Donati E, Valle G Nat Commun. 2024; 15(1):556.

PMID: 38228580 PMC: 10791662. DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-44723-3.


A Review of Current State-of-the-Art Control Methods for Lower-Limb Powered Prostheses.

Gehlhar R, Tucker M, Young A, Ames A Annu Rev Control. 2023; 55:142-164.

PMID: 37635763 PMC: 10449377. DOI: 10.1016/j.arcontrol.2023.03.003.


References
1.
Lindner H, Linacre J, Hermansson L . Assessment of capacity for myoelectric control: evaluation of construct and rating scale. J Rehabil Med. 2009; 41(6):467-74. DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0361. View

2.
Schultz A, Kuiken T . Neural interfaces for control of upper limb prostheses: the state of the art and future possibilities. PM R. 2011; 3(1):55-67. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2010.06.016. View

3.
Biddiss E, Chau T . Upper limb prosthesis use and abandonment: a survey of the last 25 years. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2007; 31(3):236-57. DOI: 10.1080/03093640600994581. View

4.
Jones L, DAVIDSON J . Save that arm: a study of problems in the remaining arm of unilateral upper limb amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1999; 23(1):55-8. DOI: 10.3109/03093649909071611. View

5.
Light C, Chappell P, Kyberd P . Establishing a standardized clinical assessment tool of pathologic and prosthetic hand function: normative data, reliability, and validity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002; 83(6):776-83. DOI: 10.1053/apmr.2002.32737. View