Movement quality of conventional prostheses and the DEKA Arm during everyday tasks.
Jeffrey Cowley, Linda Resnik, Jason Wilken and 2 others
PMID 26932980WHAT IT FOUND
The DEKA Arm did not consistently improve movement quality in 3 prosthesis users compared with conventional prostheses.
Some moved faster and smoother, others moved slower and less smooth. All still moved worse than controls.
Key findings
01The DEKA Arm did not produce a consistent movement-quality change: Participants 1 and 3 made slower, less smooth movements, while Participant 2 made faster, smoother movements.
02Unilateral reaches with the prosthetic limb were longer, slower, less smooth, and more curved than reaches with the intact limb and controls.
03The prosthetic grasp phase was longer and had more submovements than the intact limb and controls.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 3 prosthesis users were studied, so the DEKA Arm findings may reflect individual learning differences rather than a device effect. The participants used different conventional prostheses and had different prosthetic experience. This makes direct comparison between devices difficult. Training lasted about 1 month, and participants could not use the DEKA Arm outside the training sessions. Longer use might change the result. Movement quality was measured at the wrist, not the fingertip. Grasp details may have been missed.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. The DEKA Arm training was part of a Veterans Affairs Home Study.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the DEKA Arm improves movement quality for prosthesis users. The DEKA Arm did not produce a consistent change, and prosthetic limb movement remained slower, less smooth, and more curved than controls.