Evaluating reachable workspace and user control over prehensor aperture for a body-powered prosthesis
Evaluating reachable workspace and user control over prehensor aperture for a body-powered prosthesis
Using a shoulder harness and control cable, a person can control the opening and closing of a body-powered prosthesis prehensor. In many setups the cable does not pass adjacent to the shoulder joint center allowing shoulder flexion on the prosthetic side to be used for prehensor control. However, this makes cable setup a difficult compromise as prosthesis control is dependent on arm posture; too short and the space within which a person can reach may be unduly restricted, too long and the user may not be able to move their shoulder sufficiently to take up the inevitable slack at some postures and hence have no control over prehensor movement. Despite the fundamental importance of reachable workspace to users, to date there have been no studies in prosthetics on this aspect. Here, a methodology is presented to quantify the reduction in the reachable volume due to the harness, and to record the range-of-motion of the prehensor at a series of locations within the reachable workspace. Ten anatomically intact participants were assessed using a body-powered prosthesis simulator. Data was collected using a 3D motion capture system and an electronic goniometer. The harnessed reachable workspace was 38-85% the size of the unharnessed volume with participants struggling to reach across the body and above the head. Across all arm postures assessed, participants were only able to achieve full prehensor range-of-motion in 9%. The methodologies presented could be used to evaluate future designs of both body-powered and myoelectric prostheses.
Function, harness, prosthetics, range-of-motion, reach, volume, workspace
2005-2014
Chadwell, Alix
c337930e-a6b5-43e3-8ca5-eed1d2d71340
Kenney, Laurence
83d42411-ccbe-4b21-828e-9abd9775e47d
Howard, David
693fe89f-a85e-4d32-97ea-2765e99f02a7
Ssekitoleko, Robert T.
208b5a58-25e9-4787-9f2f-b5db511d9a9f
Nakandi, Brenda T.
21c76197-2f6a-4e88-b705-fc0bdcd1bc47
Head, John
cf34a318-8e41-41c4-af54-b3d970dfd24f
24 June 2020
Chadwell, Alix
c337930e-a6b5-43e3-8ca5-eed1d2d71340
Kenney, Laurence
83d42411-ccbe-4b21-828e-9abd9775e47d
Howard, David
693fe89f-a85e-4d32-97ea-2765e99f02a7
Ssekitoleko, Robert T.
208b5a58-25e9-4787-9f2f-b5db511d9a9f
Nakandi, Brenda T.
21c76197-2f6a-4e88-b705-fc0bdcd1bc47
Head, John
cf34a318-8e41-41c4-af54-b3d970dfd24f
Chadwell, Alix, Kenney, Laurence, Howard, David, Ssekitoleko, Robert T., Nakandi, Brenda T. and Head, John
(2020)
Evaluating reachable workspace and user control over prehensor aperture for a body-powered prosthesis.
IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 28 (9), , [9144540].
(doi:10.1109/TNSRE.2020.3010625).
Abstract
Using a shoulder harness and control cable, a person can control the opening and closing of a body-powered prosthesis prehensor. In many setups the cable does not pass adjacent to the shoulder joint center allowing shoulder flexion on the prosthetic side to be used for prehensor control. However, this makes cable setup a difficult compromise as prosthesis control is dependent on arm posture; too short and the space within which a person can reach may be unduly restricted, too long and the user may not be able to move their shoulder sufficiently to take up the inevitable slack at some postures and hence have no control over prehensor movement. Despite the fundamental importance of reachable workspace to users, to date there have been no studies in prosthetics on this aspect. Here, a methodology is presented to quantify the reduction in the reachable volume due to the harness, and to record the range-of-motion of the prehensor at a series of locations within the reachable workspace. Ten anatomically intact participants were assessed using a body-powered prosthesis simulator. Data was collected using a 3D motion capture system and an electronic goniometer. The harnessed reachable workspace was 38-85% the size of the unharnessed volume with participants struggling to reach across the body and above the head. Across all arm postures assessed, participants were only able to achieve full prehensor range-of-motion in 9%. The methodologies presented could be used to evaluate future designs of both body-powered and myoelectric prostheses.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Published date: 24 June 2020
Additional Information:
Funding Information:
Manuscript received March 2, 2020; revised June 17, 2020; accepted July 16, 2020. Date of publication July 20, 2020; date of current version September 7, 2020. This work was supported by the U.K. Government Global Challenges Research Fund through the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council and the National Institute for Health Research under Grant EP/R013985/1. (Corresponding author: Alix Chadwell.) Alix Chadwell, Laurence Kenney, David Howard, and John Head are with the Centre for Health Sciences Research, University of Salford, Sal-ford M5 4WT, U.K. (e-mail: a.e.a.chadwell1@salford.ac.uk; l.p.j.kenney@ salford.ac.uk; d.howard@salford.ac.uk; j.head@salford.ac.uk).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2001-2011 IEEE.
Keywords:
Function, harness, prosthetics, range-of-motion, reach, volume, workspace
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 483965
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/483965
ISSN: 1534-4320
PURE UUID: 994a6635-029d-40f1-b028-b55fd12fc060
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 07 Nov 2023 18:55
Last modified: 18 Mar 2024 04:12
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Alix Chadwell
Author:
Laurence Kenney
Author:
David Howard
Author:
Robert T. Ssekitoleko
Author:
Brenda T. Nakandi
Author:
John Head
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