Implications of prosthesis funding structures on the use of prostheses: experiences of individuals with upper limb absence

Perspectives on the comparative benefits of body-powered and myoelectric upper limb prostheses

BACKGROUND

Patient access to body-powered and myoelectric upper limb prostheses in the United States is often restricted by a healthcare system that prioritizes prosthesis prescription based on cost and perceived value. Although this system operates on an underlying assumption that design differences between these prostheses leads to relative advantages and disadvantages of each device, there is limited empirical evidence to support this view.

MAIN TEXT

This commentary article will review a series of studies conducted by our research team with the goal of differentiating how prosthesis design might impact user performance on a variety of interrelated domains. Our central hypothesis is that the design and actuation method of body-powered and myoelectric prostheses might affect users' ability to access sensory feedback and account for device properties when planning movements. Accordingly, other domains that depend on these abilities may also be affected. While our work demonstrated some differences in availability of sensory feedback based on prosthesis design, this did not result in consistent differences in prosthesis embodiment, movement accuracy, movement quality, and overall kinematic patterns.

CONCLUSION

Collectively, our findings suggest that performance may not necessarily depend on prosthesis design, allowing users to be successful with either device type depending on the circumstances. Prescription practices should rely more on individual needs and preferences than cost or prosthesis design. However, we acknowledge that there remains a dearth of evidence to inform decision-making and that an expanded research focus in this area will be beneficial.

Sex and gender differences in upper extremity prosthesis rejection: A review of literature

Prosthesis rejection is a significant barrier to rehabilitation of persons with upper limb difference. Many individual factors can affect device rejection, including a person's sex or gender. The objective of this narrative review was to explore the reported differences between the sexes and genders in upper limb prosthesis rejection. This review considered peer-reviewed, published research studies in which the study population were adults (aged 18 and older) who had unilateral or bilateral limb difference (any level) of any etiology with current, past, or no history of prosthetic device usage. Using identified keywords, index terms, and a peer-reviewed search filter, the literature was searched in MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycInfo. The reasons for rejection, disuse, or abandonment of prosthetic devices were extracted, with the focus on reported differences between sex and genders. After searching, 29 articles were selected for full-text review and 15 were included. Only 5 of 15 articles examined differences between the sexes. Women tend to reject upper extremity prostheses more than men both before and after being fit with a device; device characteristics, such as weight and cosmesis, do not appear to be appropriately designed for women; and there may not be adequate consideration of the goals for women with limb difference(s). There is inadequate reporting of sex and gender in the literature on prosthesis rejection; future studies should report and explore these factors to determine whether the needs of the full population with limb loss are being met.

Developing a Novel Prosthetic Hand with Wireless Wearable Sensor Technology Based on User Perspectives: A Pilot Study

Myoelectric hands are beneficial tools in the daily activities of people with upper-limb deficiencies. Because traditional myoelectric hands rely on detecting muscle activity in residual limbs, they are not suitable for individuals with short stumps or paralyzed limbs. Therefore, we developed a novel electric prosthetic hand that functions without myoelectricity, utilizing wearable wireless sensor technology for control. As a preliminary evaluation, our prototype hand with wireless button sensors was compared with a conventional myoelectric hand (Ottobock). Ten healthy therapists were enrolled in this study. The hands were fixed to their forearms, myoelectric hand muscle activity sensors were attached to the wrist extensor and flexor muscles, and wireless button sensors for the prostheses were attached to each user's trunk. Clinical evaluations were performed using the Simple Test for Evaluating Hand Function and the Action Research Arm Test. The fatigue degree was evaluated using the modified Borg scale before and after the tests. While no statistically significant differences were observed between the two hands across the tests, the change in the Borg scale was notably smaller for our prosthetic hand (p = 0.045). Compared with the Ottobock hand, the proposed hand prosthesis has potential for widespread applications in people with upper-limb deficiencies.

A scoping review on upper extremity prostheses: Satisfaction, barriers, and their implications in resource-limited countries

The rates of prosthetic abandonment are not extensively understood especially in resource-limited countries. A scoping review was conducted to examine the literature on the satisfaction with and barriers to using specifically upper limb prostheses. A systematic search of the literature identified 425 studies. After reviewing the articles using predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 7 cross-sectional studies were included in the final review. Barriers to the use of upper limb prostheses include the characteristics of the prosthesis (type, comfort, weight, functionality, price, and availability) and individual patient factors (recent prosthetic user, level of amputation, congenital and accidental limb loss, pain, and duration between amputation and prosthetic fitting). Considering tailored prosthetic design and funding may result in improved prosthetic adherence.

Advances in prosthetic technology: a perspective on ethical considerations for development and clinical translation

Technological advancements of prostheses in recent years, such as haptic feedback, active power, and machine learning for prosthetic control, have opened new doors for improved functioning, satisfaction, and overall quality of life. However, little attention has been paid to ethical considerations surrounding the development and translation of prosthetic technologies into clinical practice. This article, based on current literature, presents perspectives surrounding ethical considerations from the authors' multidisciplinary views as prosthetists (HG, AM, CLM, MGF), as well as combined research experience working directly with people using prostheses (AM, CLM, MGF), wearable technologies for rehabilitation (MGF, BN), machine learning and artificial intelligence (BN, KKQ), and ethics of advanced technologies (KKQ). The target audience for this article includes developers, manufacturers, and researchers of prosthetic devices and related technology. We present several ethical considerations for current advances in prosthetic technology, as well as topics for future research, that may inform product and policy decisions and positively influence the lives of those who can benefit from advances in prosthetic technology.

Out-of-pocket costs and affordability of upper limb prostheses

BACKGROUND

Given the funding policies in the Department of Veterans Affairs, the affordability of prostheses may be less of a concern among Veterans as compared to civilians.

OBJECTIVES

Compare rates of out-of-pocket prosthesis-related payments for Veterans and non-Veterans with upper limb amputation (ULA), develop and validate a measure of prosthesis affordability, and evaluate the impact of affordability on prosthesis nonuse.

STUDY DESIGN

Telephone survey of 727 persons with ULA; 76% Veterans and 24% non-Veterans.

METHODS

Odds of paying out-of-pocket costs for Veterans compared with non-Veterans were computed using logistic regression. Cognitive and pilot testing resulted in a new scale, evaluated using confirmatory factor and Rasch analysis. Proportions of respondents who cited affordability as a reason for never using or abandoning a prosthesis were calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty percent of those who ever used a prosthesis paid out-of-pocket costs. Veterans had 0.20 odds (95% confidence interval, 0.14-0.30) of paying out-of-pocket costs compared with non-Veterans. Confirmatory factor analysis supported unidimensionality of the 4-item Prosthesis Affordability scale. Rasch person reliability was 0.78. Cronbach alpha was 0.87. Overall, 14% of prosthesis never-users said affordability was a reason for nonuse; 9.6% and 16.5% of former prosthesis users said affordability of repairs or replacement, respectively, was a reason for abandonment.

CONCLUSIONS

Out-of-pocket prosthesis costs were paid by 20% of those sample, with Veterans less likely to incur costs. The Prosthesis Affordability scale developed in this study was reliable and valid for persons with ULA. Prosthesis affordability was a common reason for never using or abandoning prostheses.

Caring for Children With Congenital Upper Extremity Differences

The purpose of this article is to provide information about the changing landscapes in research, treatment, civil rights' protection, disability awareness, and accepted terminology in the care of children with congenital upper limb differences. This knowledge can guide clinical and nonclinical conversations between patients and their families.

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

PURPOSE

There is a large body of evidence demonstrating high rates of prosthesis abandonment in the upper extremity. However, these surveys were conducted years ago, thus the influence of recent refinements in prosthetic technology on acceptance is unknown. This study aims to gather current data on prosthetic usage, to assess the effects of these advancements.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to 68 traumatic upper limb amputees treated within the Austrian Trauma Insurance Agency between the years 1996 and 2016. Responses were grouped by the year of amputation to assess the effect of time.

RESULTS

The rejection rate at all levels of amputation was 44%. There was no significant difference in acceptance between responders amputated before or after 2006 (p = 0.939). Among users, 92.86% (n = 13) used a myoelectric, while only one amputee (7.14%, n = 1) used a body-powered device. Most responders complained about the comfort (60.87%, n = 14) as well as the weight of the device (52.17%, n = 12).

CONCLUSIONS

The advancements of the last decade in the arena of upper limb prosthetics have not yet achieved a significant change in prosthetic abandonment within this study cohort. Although academic solutions have been presented to tackle patient's complaints, clinical reality still shows high rejection rates of cost-intensive prosthetic devices.Implications for rehabilitationAbandonment rates in prosthetic rehabilitation after upper limb amputation have shown to be 50% and higher.The advancements of the last decade in the arena of upper limb prosthetics have not yet achieved a significant change in prosthetic abandonment.Well-structured and patient-tailored prosthetic training as well as ensuring the amputee's active participation in the decision making process will most likely improve prosthetic acceptance.

Additive Manufacturing of Prostheses Using Forest-Based Composites

A custom-made prosthetic product is unique for each patient. Fossil-based thermoplastics are the dominant raw materials in both prosthetic and industrial applications; there is a general demand for reducing their use and replacing them with renewable, biobased materials. A transtibial prosthesis sets strict demands on mechanical strength, durability, reliability, etc., which depend on the biocomposite used and also the additive manufacturing (AM) process. The aim of this project was to develop systematic solutions for prosthetic products and services by combining biocomposites using forestry-based derivatives with AM techniques. Composite materials made of polypropylene (PP) reinforced with microfibrillated cellulose (MFC) were developed. The MFC contents (20, 30 and 40 wt%) were uniformly dispersed in the polymer PP matrix, and the MFC addition significantly enhanced the mechanical performance of the materials. With 30 wt% MFC, the tensile strength and Young´s modulus was about twice that of the PP when injection molding was performed. The composite material was successfully applied with an AM process, i.e., fused deposition modeling (FDM), and a transtibial prosthesis was created based on the end-user’s data. A clinical trial of the prosthesis was conducted with successful outcomes in terms of wearing experience, appearance (color), and acceptance towards the materials and the technique. Given the layer-by-layer nature of AM processes, structural and process optimizations are needed to maximize the reinforcement effects of MFC to eliminate variations in the binding area between adjacent layers and to improve the adhesion between layers.

Obstacles to Prosthetic Care—Legal and Ethical Aspects of Access to Upper and Lower Limb Prosthetics in Germany and the Improvement of Prosthetic Care from a Social Perspective

Prosthetic technology for people with missing limbs has made great progress in recent decades. However, acceptance rates and user satisfaction are not only dependent on technical aspects, but also to a great extent on social and psychological factors. We propose that these factors should receive greater attention in order to improve prosthetic care and give recommendations how to incorporate the findings from social science in research and development (R&D) and in care practice. Limited access due to high costs of new prosthetic technology combined with rising costs in health care systems in general is a further issue we address. Our legal and ethical analysis of the reimbursement process in Germany shows that this issue requires further empirical investigation, a stakeholder dialogue and maybe even policy changes. Social science knowledge and participatory methods are of high relevance to answer questions about the benefit of prosthetics for users, based on individual needs and preferences, which should be at the core of debates on ethical resource allocation.

The influence of environment: Experiences of users of myoelectric arm prosthesis-a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Prostheses are used to varying degrees; however, little is known about how environmental aspects influence this use.

OBJECTIVES

To describe users' experiences of how environmental factors influence their use of a myoelectric arm prosthesis.

STUDY DESIGN

Qualitative and descriptive.

METHODS

A total of 13 patients previously provided with a myoelectric prosthetic hand participated. Their age, sex, deficiency level, etiology, current prosthesis use, and experience varied. Semi-structured interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed through inductive content analysis.

RESULTS

Four categories were created from the data: "Prosthesis function," "Other people's attitudes," "Support from family and healthcare," and "Individual's attitude and strategies." The overarching theme, "Various degrees of embodiment lead to different experiences of environmental barriers and facilitators," emerged from differences in individual responses depending on whether the individual was a daily or a non-daily prosthesis user. Environmental facilitators such as support from family and healthcare and good function and fit of the prosthesis seemed to help the embodiment of the prosthesis, leading to daily use. This embodiment seemed to reduce the influence of environmental barriers, for example, climate, attitudes, and technical shortcomings.

CONCLUSION

Embodiment of prostheses seems to reduce the impact of environmental barriers. Support and training may facilitate the embodiment of myoelectric prosthesis use. Clinical relevance For successful prosthetic rehabilitation, environmental factors such as support and information to the patient and their social network about the benefits of prosthesis use are important. Local access to training in myoelectric control gives more people the opportunity to adapt to prosthesis use and experience less environmental barriers.

High Cable Forces Deteriorate Pinch Force Control in Voluntary-Closing Body-Powered Prostheses

Background

It is generally asserted that reliable and intuitive control of upper-limb prostheses requires adequate feedback of prosthetic finger positions and pinch forces applied to objects. Body-powered prostheses (BPPs) provide the user with direct proprioceptive feedback. Currently available BPPs often require high cable operation forces, which complicates control of the forces at the terminal device. The aim of this study is to quantify the influence of high cable forces on object manipulation with voluntary-closing prostheses.

Method

Able-bodied male subjects were fitted with a bypass-prosthesis with low and high cable force settings for the prehensor. Subjects were requested to grasp and transfer a collapsible object as fast as they could without dropping or breaking it. The object had a low and a high breaking force setting.

Results

Subjects conducted significantly more successful manipulations with the low cable force setting, both for the low (33% more) and high (50%) object’s breaking force. The time to complete the task was not different between settings during successful manipulation trials.

Conclusion

High cable forces lead to reduced pinch force control during object manipulation. This implies that low cable operation forces should be a key design requirement for voluntary-closing BPPs.