Abstract
BackgroundDespite the technological advancements in myoelectric prostheses, body-powered prostheses remain a popular choice for amputees, in part due to the natural sensory advantage they provide. Research on haptic feedback in myoelectric prostheses has delivered mixed results. Furthermore, there is limited research comparing various haptic feedback modalities in myoelectric prostheses. In this paper, we present a comparison of the feedback intrinsically present in body-powered prostheses (joint-torque feedback) to a commonly proposed feedback modality for myoelectric prostheses (vibrotactile feedback). In so doing, we seek to understand whether the advantages of kinesthetic feedback present in body-powered prostheses translate to myoelectric prostheses, and whether there are differences between kinesthetic and cutaneous feedback in prosthetic applications.MethodsWe developed an experimental testbed that features a cable-driven, voluntary-closing 1-DoF prosthesis, a capstan-driven elbow exoskeleton, and a vibrotactile actuation unit. The system can present grip force to users as either a flexion moment about the elbow or vibration on the wrist. To provide an equal comparison of joint-torque and vibrotactile feedback, a stimulus intensity matching scheme was utilized. Non-amputee participants (n=12) were asked to discriminate objects of varying stiffness with the prosthesis in three conditions: no haptic feedback, vibrotactile feedback, and joint-torque feedback.ResultsResults indicate that haptic feedback increased discrimination accuracy over no haptic feedback, but the difference between joint-torque feedback and vibrotactile feedback was not significant. In addition, our results highlight nuanced differences in performance depending on the objects’ stiffness, and suggest that participants likely pay less attention to incidental cues with the addition of haptic feedback.ConclusionEven when haptic feedback is not modality matched to the task, such as in the case of vibrotactile feedback, performance with a myoelectric prosthesis can improve significantly. This implies it is possible to achieve the same benefits with vibrotactile feedback, which is cheaper and easier to implement than other forms of feedback.
Highlights
Despite the technological advancements in myoelectric prostheses, body-powered prostheses remain a popular choice for amputees, in part due to the natural sensory advantage they provide
We present a generalized methodology for comparing various haptic feedback modalities in a myoelectric prosthesis for the same experimental task
In this study, we investigated the utility of cutaneous and kinesthetic haptic feedback in a myoelectric prosthesis and found that both feedback modalities resulted in performance that was significantly better than the clinical standard, no haptic feedback
Summary
Despite the technological advancements in myoelectric prostheses, body-powered prostheses remain a popular choice for amputees, in part due to the natural sensory advantage they provide. Despite the technological and aesthetic advantages available in myoelectric prostheses, body-powered prostheses remain a common choice for amputees [3] This is due in part to the inherent kinesthetic (force and motion based) feedback provided by their mechanical linkages and cabling [4], which supports the concept of extended physiological proprioception [5, 6]. As empirically validated previously by members of our research group, the added utility of the kinesthetic (joint-torque) feedback available in body-powered prostheses provides a natural sensory advantage over traditional myoelectric prostheses [7]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
