The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository
Warning ePrints Soton is experiencing an issue with some file downloads not being available. We are working hard to fix this. Please bear with us.

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review
Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review
Background
Understanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper- and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring.

Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis-users during daily-living.

Results
60 lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lower-limb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm.

Conclusions
Activity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user’s requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.
1743-0003
1-26
Chadwell, Alixandra
53ddc15e-9ec9-4435-84d0-66cc88bcfc1e
Diment, Laura
ae7297b9-3a62-4e7c-a52d-49aba51b7608
Mico Amigo, Maria Encarnacion
cdf0b704-67c1-4dae-941b-aa7f00034fc4
Morgado Ramirez, Dafne
62ed51d3-1078-4711-aebe-11c24bf0e12b
Dickinson, Alexander
10151972-c1b5-4f7d-bc12-6482b5870cad
Granat, Malcolm
396353c5-55f1-4362-a450-3f0ef6e7cbe6
Kenney, Laurence
90b43298-31e7-4651-bd0e-0ea7eb74957f
Kheng, Sisary
18217ffe-4fb2-433d-8db0-5a75464f7d18
Sobuh, Mohammad
7a523485-4365-4527-ace2-79eb3a3215d3
Ssekitoleko, Robert
0763278e-e280-4d08-9205-5aeb08388e22
Worsley, Peter
6d33aee3-ef43-468d-aef6-86d190de6756
Chadwell, Alixandra
53ddc15e-9ec9-4435-84d0-66cc88bcfc1e
Diment, Laura
ae7297b9-3a62-4e7c-a52d-49aba51b7608
Mico Amigo, Maria Encarnacion
cdf0b704-67c1-4dae-941b-aa7f00034fc4
Morgado Ramirez, Dafne
62ed51d3-1078-4711-aebe-11c24bf0e12b
Dickinson, Alexander
10151972-c1b5-4f7d-bc12-6482b5870cad
Granat, Malcolm
396353c5-55f1-4362-a450-3f0ef6e7cbe6
Kenney, Laurence
90b43298-31e7-4651-bd0e-0ea7eb74957f
Kheng, Sisary
18217ffe-4fb2-433d-8db0-5a75464f7d18
Sobuh, Mohammad
7a523485-4365-4527-ace2-79eb3a3215d3
Ssekitoleko, Robert
0763278e-e280-4d08-9205-5aeb08388e22
Worsley, Peter
6d33aee3-ef43-468d-aef6-86d190de6756

Chadwell, Alixandra, Diment, Laura, Mico Amigo, Maria Encarnacion, Morgado Ramirez, Dafne, Dickinson, Alexander, Granat, Malcolm, Kenney, Laurence, Kheng, Sisary, Sobuh, Mohammad, Ssekitoleko, Robert and Worsley, Peter (2020) Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 17 (1), 1-26, [93]. (doi:10.1186/s12984-020-00711-4).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Background
Understanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper- and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring.

Methods
A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis-users during daily-living.

Results
60 lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lower-limb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm.

Conclusions
Activity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user’s requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.

Text
Manuscript - Author's Original
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
Text
s12984-020-00711-4 - Version of Record
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (1MB)

More information

Submitted date: 6 March 2020
Accepted/In Press date: 23 June 2020
e-pub ahead of print date: 14 July 2020
Published date: 2020

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 441633
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/441633
ISSN: 1743-0003
PURE UUID: 828e17dd-e85a-4c2c-8c3a-669305b3b9c0
ORCID for Alexander Dickinson: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-9647-1944
ORCID for Peter Worsley: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-0145-5042

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 23 Jun 2020 16:30
Last modified: 26 Nov 2021 02:53

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Alixandra Chadwell
Author: Laura Diment
Author: Maria Encarnacion Mico Amigo
Author: Dafne Morgado Ramirez
Author: Malcolm Granat
Author: Laurence Kenney
Author: Sisary Kheng
Author: Mohammad Sobuh
Author: Robert Ssekitoleko
Author: Peter Worsley ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×