Case-study of a User-driven Prosthetic Arm Design: Bionic Hand Versus Customized Body-powered Technology in a Highly Demanding Work Environment

Overview

Journal J Neuroeng Rehabil

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Biomedical Engineering
Neurology
Rehabilitation Medicine

Date 2018 Jan 5

PMID 29298708

Citations 11

Authors

Wolf Schweitzer

Michael J Thali

David Egger

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

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.

Citing Articles

In-silico tool based on Boolean networks and meshless simulations for prediction of reaction and transport mechanisms in the systemic administration of chemotherapeutic drugs.

Velez Salazar F, Patino I PLoS One. 2025; 20(2):e0315194.

PMID: 39919263 PMC: 11805580. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315194.

A novel classification method for balance differences in elite versus expert athletes based on composite multiscale complexity index and ranking forests.

Cheng Y, Wu D, Wu Y, Guo Y, Cui X, Zhang P PLoS One. 2025; 20(1):e0315454.

PMID: 39883735 PMC: 11781753. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0315454.

Should you hold onto the treadmill handrails or not? Cortical evidence at different walking speeds.

Biggio M, Iester C, Cattaneo D, Cutini S, Bisio A, Pedulla L J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2025; 22(1):5.

PMID: 39815334 PMC: 11736955. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-025-01543-w.

Numerical and experimental methods for the assessment of a human finger-inspired soft pneumatic actuator for gripping applications.

Bhat S, Doreswamy D, Hegde A, Nukarapu V, Bhat S, Puneeth S MethodsX. 2025; 14():103111.

PMID: 39811617 PMC: 11731513. DOI: 10.1016/j.mex.2024.103111.

Design, modeling, and preliminary evaluation of a simple wrist-hand stretching orthosis for neurologically impaired patients.

Ledoux E, Kumar N, Barth E Wearable Technol. 2025; 5():e19.

PMID: 39811478 PMC: 11729525. DOI: 10.1017/wtc.2024.22.

References

Dermitzakis K, Arieta A, Pfeifer R . Gesture recognition in upper-limb prosthetics: a viability study using dynamic time warping and gyroscopes. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2012; 2011:4530-3. DOI: 10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6091122. View

Smit G, Bongers R, Van der Sluis C, Plettenburg D . Efficiency of voluntary opening hand and hook prosthetic devices: 24 years of development?. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012; 49(4):523-34. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2011.07.0125. View

Davidson J . A survey of the satisfaction of upper limb amputees with their prostheses, their lifestyles, and their abilities. J Hand Ther. 2002; 15(1):62-70. DOI: 10.1053/hanthe.2002.v15.01562. View

Lee D . Seventy-five years of searching for a heat index. Environ Res. 1980; 22(2):331-56. DOI: 10.1016/0013-9351(80)90146-2. View

Ray G, Saxena S, Mukhopadhyay P . Myoelectric control of an artificial hand for sequential movement in a tropical climate. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1979; 17(6):724-8. DOI: 10.1007/BF02441553. View

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

Riener R . The Cybathlon promotes the development of assistive technology for people with physical disabilities. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016; 13(1):49. PMC: 4886429. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-016-0157-2. View

Sturup J, Thyregod H, Jensen J, Retpen J, Boberg G, Rasmussen E . Traumatic amputation of the upper limb: the use of body-powered prostheses and employment consequences. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1988; 12(1):50-2. DOI: 10.3109/03093648809079390. View

Wright T, Hagen A, Wood M . Prosthetic usage in major upper extremity amputations. J Hand Surg Am. 1995; 20(4):619-22. DOI: 10.1016/S0363-5023(05)80278-3. View

10.

Petersen N, Thieschafer L, Ploutz-Snyder L, Damann V, Mester J . Reliability of a new test battery for fitness assessment of the European Astronaut corps. Extrem Physiol Med. 2015; 4:12. PMC: 4535782. DOI: 10.1186/s13728-015-0032-y. View

11.

Bernardi M, Solomonow M, Nguyen G, Smith A, Baratta R . Motor unit recruitment strategy changes with skill acquisition. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1996; 74(1-2):52-9. DOI: 10.1007/BF00376494. View

12.

Huinink L, Bouwsema H, Plettenburg D, Van der Sluis C, Bongers R . Learning to use a body-powered prosthesis: changes in functionality and kinematics. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016; 13(1):90. PMC: 5054596. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-016-0197-7. View

13.

Deijs M, Bongers R, Ringeling-van Leusen N, van der Sluis C . Flexible and static wrist units in upper limb prosthesis users: functionality scores, user satisfaction and compensatory movements. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016; 13:26. PMC: 4791860. DOI: 10.1186/s12984-016-0130-0. View

14.

Postema S, Van der Sluis C, Waldenlov K, Hermansson L . Body structures and physical complaints in upper limb reduction deficiency: a 24-year follow-up study. PLoS One. 2012; 7(11):e49727. PMC: 3511484. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0049727. View

15.

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

16.

Gaine W, Smart C, Bransby-Zachary M . Upper limb traumatic amputees. Review of prosthetic use. J Hand Surg Br. 1997; 22(1):73-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0266-7681(97)80023-x. View

17.

Patterson T, Stecker M, Netherton B . Mechanisms of electrode induced injury. Part 2: Clinical experience. Am J Electroneurodiagnostic Technol. 2007; 47(2):93-113. View

18.

Carey S, Lura D, Highsmith M . Differences in myoelectric and body-powered upper-limb prostheses: Systematic literature review. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2015; 52(3):247-62. DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0192. View

19.

Marini F, Tagliabue C, Sposito A, Hernandez-Arieta A, Brugger P, Estevez N . Crossmodal representation of a functional robotic hand arises after extensive training in healthy participants. Neuropsychologia. 2013; 53:178-86. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.11.017. View

20.

Atzori M, Gijsberts A, Caputo B, Muller H . Natural control capabilities of robotic hands by hand amputated subjects. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2015; 2014:4362-5. DOI: 10.1109/EMBC.2014.6944590. View