Berning Kelsey, Cohick Sarah, Johnson Reva, Miller Laura Ann, Sensinger Jonathon W
Department of Biomedical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(2):253-61. doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2013.05.0123.
Persons with an upper-limb amputation who use a body-powered prosthesis typically control the prehensor through contralateral shoulder movement, which is transmitted through a Bowden cable. Increased cable tension either opens or closes the prehensor; when tension is released, some passive element, such as a spring, returns the prehensor to the default state (closed or open). In this study, we used the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure to examine functional differences between these two types of prehensors in 29 nondisabled subjects (who used a body-powered bypass prosthesis) and 2 persons with unilateral transradial amputations (who used a conventional body-powered device). We also administered a survey to determine whether subjects preferred one prehensor or the other for specific tasks, with a long-term goal of assessing whether a prehensor that could switch between both modes would be advantageous. We found that using the voluntary closing prehensor was 1.3 s faster (p = 0.02) than using the voluntary opening prehensor, across tasks, and that there was consensus among subjects on which types of tasks they preferred to do with each prehensor type. Twenty-five subjects wanted a device that could switch between the two modes in order to perform particular tasks.
使用体动假肢的上肢截肢者通常通过对侧肩部运动来控制抓握器,该运动通过鲍登电缆进行传递。电缆张力增加会打开或关闭抓握器;当张力释放时,一些被动元件(如弹簧)会使抓握器恢复到默认状态(打开或关闭)。在本研究中,我们使用南安普顿手部评估程序,对29名非残疾受试者(使用体动旁路假肢)和2名单侧经桡骨截肢者(使用传统体动装置)的这两种抓握器的功能差异进行了检查。我们还进行了一项调查,以确定受试者在特定任务中是否更喜欢一种抓握器而非另一种,其长期目标是评估一种能够在两种模式之间切换的抓握器是否具有优势。我们发现,在各项任务中,使用主动闭合抓握器比使用主动打开抓握器快1.3秒(p = 0.02),并且受试者对于每种抓握器类型更适合执行哪种任务类型达成了共识。25名受试者希望有一种能够在两种模式之间切换的装置,以便执行特定任务。