Engdahl Susannah M, Christie Breanne P, Kelly Brian, Davis Alicia, Chestek Cynthia A, Gates Deanna H
Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015 Jun 13;12:53. doi: 10.1186/s12984-015-0044-2.
Novel techniques for the control of upper limb prostheses may allow users to operate more complex prostheses than those that are currently available. Because many of these techniques are surgically invasive, it is important to understand whether individuals with upper limb loss would accept the associated risks in order to use a prosthesis.
An online survey of individuals with upper limb loss was conducted. Participants read descriptions of four prosthetic control techniques. One technique was noninvasive (myoelectric) and three were invasive (targeted muscle reinnervation, peripheral nerve interfaces, cortical interfaces). Participants rated how likely they were to try each technique if it offered each of six different functional features. They also rated their general interest in each of the six features. A two-way repeated measures analysis of variance with Greenhouse-Geisser corrections was used to examine the effect of the technique type and feature on participants' interest in each technique.
Responses from 104 individuals were analyzed. Many participants were interested in trying the techniques - 83 % responded positively toward myoelectric control, 63 % toward targeted muscle reinnervation, 68 % toward peripheral nerve interfaces, and 39 % toward cortical interfaces. Common concerns about myoelectric control were weight, cost, durability, and difficulty of use, while the most common concern about the invasive techniques was surgical risk. Participants expressed greatest interest in basic prosthesis features (e.g., opening and closing the hand slowly), as opposed to advanced features like fine motor control and touch sensation.
The results of these investigations may be used to inform the development of future prosthetic technologies that are appealing to individuals with upper limb loss.
用于控制上肢假肢的新技术可能使使用者能够操作比目前可用的更复杂的假肢。由于这些技术中的许多都具有手术侵入性,因此了解上肢缺失者是否会为了使用假肢而接受相关风险非常重要。
对上肢缺失者进行了一项在线调查。参与者阅读了四种假肢控制技术的描述。一种技术是非侵入性的(肌电控制),三种是侵入性的(靶向肌肉再支配、外周神经接口、皮质接口)。参与者对如果每种技术提供六种不同功能特性中的每一种,他们尝试该技术的可能性进行了评分。他们还对六种特性中的每一种的总体兴趣进行了评分。采用带有Greenhouse-Geisser校正的双向重复测量方差分析来检验技术类型和特性对参与者对每种技术兴趣的影响。
分析了104人的回复。许多参与者对尝试这些技术感兴趣——83%的人对肌电控制给出了积极回应,63%的人对靶向肌肉再支配感兴趣,68%的人对外周神经接口感兴趣,39%的人对皮质接口感兴趣。对肌电控制的常见担忧是重量、成本、耐用性和使用难度,而对侵入性技术最常见的担忧是手术风险。参与者对基本的假肢功能(例如缓慢张开和闭合手部)表现出最大兴趣,而不是对精细运动控制和触感等高级功能。
这些调查结果可用于为未来吸引上肢缺失者的假肢技术的开发提供参考。