Current rates of prosthetic usage in upper-limb amputees – have innovations had an impact on device acceptance?

References

• Meyer TM. Psychological aspects of mutilating hand injuries. Hand Clin. 2003;19(1):41–49.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, et al. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(3):422–429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salminger S, Roche AD, Hruby LA, et al. Prosthetic reconstruction to restore function in transcarpal amputees. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2015;69(3):305–310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biddiss EA, Chau TT. Upper limb prosthesis use and abandonment: a survey of the last 25 years. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2007;31(3):236–257.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Østlie K, Skjeldal OH, Garfelt B, et al. Adult acquired major upper limb amputation in Norway: prevalence, demographic features and amputation specific features. A population-based survey. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33(17–18):1636–1649.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones LE, Davidson JH. The long-term outcome of upper limb amputees treated at a rehabilitation centre in Sydney, Australia. Disabil Rehabil. 1995;17(8):437–442.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright TW, Hagen AD, Wood MB. Prosthetic usage in major upper extremity amputations. J Hand Surg Am. 1995;20(4):619–622.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yamamoto M, Chung KC, Sterbenz J, et al. Cross-sectional international multicenter study on quality of life and reasons for abandonment of upper limb prostheses. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019;7:e2205.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Østlie K, Lesjø IM, Franklin RJ, et al. Prosthesis use in adult acquired major upper-limb amputees: patterns of wear, prosthetic skills and the actual use of prostheses in activities of daily life. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2012;7(6):479–493.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lindner HYN, Nätterlund BS, Hermansson LMN. Upper limb prosthetic outcome measures: review and content comparison based on International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2010;34(2):109–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hussaini A, Kyberd P. Refined clothespin relocation test and assessment of motion. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2017;41(3):294–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouwsema H, Kyberd PJ, Hill W, et al. Determining skill level in myoelectric prosthesis use with multiple outcome measures. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2012;49(9):1331–1348.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pylatiuk C, Schulz S, Döderlein L. Results of an Internet survey of myoelectric prosthetic hand users. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2007;31(4):362–370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Datta D, Selvarajah K, Davey N. Functional outcome of patients with proximal upper limb deficiency-acquired and congenital. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18(2):172–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salminger S, Vujaklija I, Sturma A, et al. Functional outcome scores with standard myoelectric prostheses in below-elbow amputees. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2018;98(2):125–129.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkins D, Heard D, Donovan W. Epidemiologic overview of individuals with upper-limb loss and their reported research priorities. J Prosthet Orthot. 1996;8:2–11.
   Google Scholar
• Burger H, Marincek C. Upper limb prosthetic use in Slovenia. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1994;18(1):25–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dudkiewicz I, Gabrielov R, Seiv-Ner I, et al. Evaluation of prosthetic usage in upper limb amputees. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26(1):60–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kejlaa GH. Consumer concerns and the functional value of prostheses to upper limb amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1993;17(3):157–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kyberd PJ, Hill W. Survey of upper limb prosthesis users in Sweden, the United Kingdom and Canada. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2011;35(2):234–241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schultz AE, Baade SP, Kuiken TA. Expert opinions on success factors for upper-limb prostheses. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2007;44(4):483–489.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Biddiss E, Chau T. Upper-limb prosthetics: critical factors in device abandonment. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;86(12):977–987.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Østlie K, Lesjø IM, Franklin RJ, et al. Prosthesis rejection in acquired major upper-limb amputees: a population-based survey. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2012;7(4):294–303.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roche AD, Rehbaum H, Farina D, et al. Prosthetic myoelectric control strategies: a clinical perspective. Curr Surg Rep. 2014;2(3):44.
   Google Scholar
• Farina D, Aszmann O. Bionic limbs: clinical reality and academic promises. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6(257):257ps12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ortiz-Catalan M, Håkansson B, Brånemark R. An osseointegrated human-machine gateway for long-term sensory feedback and motor control of artificial limbs. Sci Transl Med. 2014;6(257):257re6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salminger S, Sturma A, Hofer C, et al. Long-term implant of intramuscular sensors and nerve transfers for wireless control of robotic arms in above-elbow amputees. Sci Robot. 2019;4(32):eaaw6306.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuiken TA, Dumanian GA, Lipschutz RD, et al. The use of targeted muscle reinnervation for improved myoelectric prosthesis control in a bilateral shoulder disarticulation amputee. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2004;28(3):245–253.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salminger S, Sturma A, Roche AD, et al. Outcomes, challenges, and pitfalls after targeted muscle reinnervation in high level amputees. Is it worth the effort? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;144(6):1037e–1043e.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salminger S, Sturma A, Roche AD, et al. Functional and psychosocial outcomes of hand transplantation compared with prosthetic fitting in below-elbow amputees: a multicenter cohort study. PLoS One. 2016;11(9):e0162507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biddiss E, McKeever P, Lindsay S, et al. Implications of prosthesis funding structures on the use of prostheses: experiences of individuals with upper limb absence. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2011;35(2):215–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roeschlein RA, Domholdt E. Factors related to successful upper extremity prosthetic use. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1989;13(1):14–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durance JP, O'Shea BJ. Upper limb amputees: a clinic profile. Int Disabil Stud. 1988;10(2):68–72.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Biddiss EA, Chau TT. Multivariate prediction of upper limb prosthesis acceptance or rejection. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2008;3(4):181–192.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smail LC, Neal C, Wilkins C, et al. Comfort and function remain key factors in upper limb prosthetic abandonment: findings of a scoping review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2020;1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Williams T. Controlling powered upper extremity prostheses now and in the future. Proceedings of the MEC ’05 Integrating Prosthetics and Medicine. Vol. 56; 2005. p. 61.
   Google Scholar
• Kuiken TA, Miller LA, Lipschutz RD, et al. Targeted reinnervation for enhanced prosthetic arm function in a woman with a proximal amputation: a case study. Lancet. 2007;369(9559):371–380.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tkach DC, Young AJ, Smith LH, et al. Real-time and offline performance of pattern recognition myoelectric control using a generic electrode grid with targeted muscle reinnervation patients. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2014;22(4):727–734.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farina D, Vujaklija I, Brånemark R, et al. Towards the large-scale clinical application of next-generation bionic limbs. Nat Biomed Eng. 2020.
   Google Scholar