Differences in myoelectric and body-powered upper-limb prostheses: Systematic literature review

被引:129
作者
Carey, Stephanie L. [1 ]
Lura, Derek J. [2 ]
Highsmith, M. Jason [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ S Florida, Dept Mech Engn, Tampa, FL 33612 USA
[2] Florida Gulf Coast Univ, Dept Bioengn & Software Engn, UA Whitaker Coll Engn, Ft Myers, FL USA
[3] Univ S Florida, Sch Phys Therapy & Rehabil Sci, Morsani Coll Med, Tampa, FL USA
关键词
amputation; artificial limb; control; cosmesis; external power; function; prosthesis; rehabilitation; transhumeral; transradial; UPPER EXTREMITY PROSTHETICS; TAPES QUESTIONNAIRE; CLINICAL-EVALUATION; FINAL REPORT; ABOVE-ELBOW; AMPUTEES; PAIN; SATISFACTION; DEVICE; SERVICEMEMBERS;
D O I
10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0192
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
The choice of a myoelectrie or body-powered upper-limb prosthesis can be determined using factors including control, function, feedback, cosmesis, and rejection. Although body-powered and myoelectric control strategies offer unique functions, many prosthesis users must choose one. A systematic review was conducted to determine differences between myoelectric and body-powered prostheses to inform evidence-based clinical practice regarding prescription of these devices and training of users. A search of 9 databases identified 462 unique publications. Ultimately, 31 of them were included and 11 empirical evidence statements were developed. Conflicting evidence has been found in terms of the relative functional performance of body-powered and myoelectric prostheses. Body-powered prostheses have been shown to have advantages in durability, training time, frequency of adjustment, maintenance, and feedback; however, they could still benefit from improvements of control. Myoelectric prostheses have been shown to improve cosmesis and phantom-limb pain and are more accepted for light-intensity work. Currently, evidence is insufficient to conclude that either system provides a significant general advantage. Prosthetic selection should be based on a patient's individual needs and include personal preferences, prosthetic experience, and functional needs. This work demonstrates that there is a lack of empirical evidence regarding functional differences in upper-limb prostheses.
引用
收藏
页码:247 / 262
页数:16
相关论文
共 56 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], SIGN 50 GUID DEV HDB
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1996, JPO: Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, DOI DOI 10.1097/00008526-199601000-00003
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2000, J Prosthet Orthot
[4]   Update on Advances in Upper Extremity Prosthetics [J].
Behrend, Caleb ;
Reizner, Wayne ;
Marchessault, Jeffrey A. ;
Hammert, Warren C. .
JOURNAL OF HAND SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2011, 36A (10) :1711-1717
[5]  
BERBRAYER D, 1994, J PROSTHET ORTHOT, V6, P48
[6]  
Bertels Thomas., 2009, JPO J PROSTHETICS OR, V21, P74, DOI DOI 10.1097/JPO.0B013E3181A10F46
[7]   Upper-limb prosthetics - Critical factors in device abandonment [J].
Biddiss, Elaine ;
Chau, Tom .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE & REHABILITATION, 2007, 86 (12) :977-987
[8]   Consumer design priorities for upper limb prosthetics [J].
Biddiss, Elaine ;
Beaton, Dorcas ;
Chau, Tom .
DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION-ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY, 2007, 2 (06) :346-357
[9]   Upper limb prosthesis use and abandonment: A survey of the last 25 years [J].
Biddiss, Elaine A. ;
Chau, Tom T. .
PROSTHETICS AND ORTHOTICS INTERNATIONAL, 2007, 31 (03) :236-257
[10]   Prosthetic cost projections for servicemembers with major limb loss from Vietnam and OIF/OEF [J].
Blough, David K. ;
Hubbard, Sharon ;
McFarland, Lynne V. ;
Smith, Douglas G. ;
Gambel, Jeffrey M. ;
Reiber, Gayle E. .
JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 2010, 47 (04) :387-402