Abstract

BackgroundSurgically invasive interfaces for upper limb prosthesis control may allow users to operate advanced, multi-articulated devices. Given the potential medical risks of these invasive interfaces, it is important to understand what factors influence an individual’s decision to try one.MethodsWe conducted an anonymous online survey of individuals with upper limb loss. A total of 232 participants provided personal information (such as age, amputation level, etc.) and rated how likely they would be to try noninvasive (myoelectric) and invasive (targeted muscle reinnervation, peripheral nerve interfaces, cortical interfaces) interfaces for prosthesis control. Bivariate relationships between interest in each interface and 16 personal descriptors were examined. Significant variables from the bivariate analyses were then entered into multiple logistic regression models to predict interest in each interface.ResultsWhile many of the bivariate relationships were significant, only a few variables remained significant in the regression models. The regression models showed that participants were more likely to be interested in all interfaces if they had unilateral limb loss (p ≤ 0.001, odds ratio ≥ 2.799). Participants were more likely to be interested in the three invasive interfaces if they were younger (p < 0.001, odds ratio ≤ 0.959) and had acquired limb loss (p ≤ 0.012, odds ratio ≥ 3.287). Participants who used a myoelectric device were more likely to be interested in myoelectric control than those who did not (p = 0.003, odds ratio = 24.958).ConclusionsNovel prosthesis control interfaces may be accepted most readily by individuals who are young, have unilateral limb loss, and/or have acquired limb loss However, this analysis did not include all possible factors that may have influenced participant’s opinions on the interfaces, so additional exploration is warranted.

Highlights

  • Despite the significant functional limitations that upper limb loss can impose, many individuals with upper limb loss choose not to use a prosthesis

  • The regression models showed that participants were more likely to be interested in all interfaces if they had unilateral limb loss (p 0.001, odds ratio ! 2.799)

  • Participants were more likely to be interested in the three invasive interfaces if they were younger (p < 0.001, odds ratio 0.959) and had acquired limb loss (p 0.012, odds ratio ! 3.287)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Despite the significant functional limitations that upper limb loss can impose, many individuals with upper limb loss choose not to use a prosthesis. Individuals with upper limb loss have reported a desire for prostheses with improved dexterity (including independent movement of the fingers and arm joints, increased range of motion, and wider variety of grasp patterns) [2, 3]. The utility of such a prosthesis would be significant in comparison to most current commercially available prostheses, which permit only one degree of freedom (open/close) [4, 5] and can be cumbersome to use. Given the potential medical risks of these invasive interfaces, it is important to understand what factors influence an individual’s decision to try one

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

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 call