Passive prosthetic hands and tools: A literature review.
Bartjan Maat, Gerwin Smit, Dick Plettenburg and 1 others
PMID 28190380WHAT IT FOUND
Passive prostheses are used by about one in three potential users, mostly for appearance and comfort, not just as a step toward active devices.
They offer limited but sufficient function for many daily tasks. Research should focus on adjustable hands and tools for work and sports.
Key findings
01On average, about one out of three potential prosthetic hand users chooses a passive prosthesis, with usage rates ranging from 13% to 64% across studies.
02Users prioritize appearance and comfort over function, and passive hands are often used in social settings to enhance self-image rather than for complex manipulation.
03People with unilateral upper limb loss often compensate effectively with their sound hand, meaning passive prostheses need only provide limited functionality for most activities of daily living.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat 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
The review did not perform a formal quality check of the included studies, relying on peer-review status as a proxy for quality. The literature uses inconsistent terminology, making it difficult to compare studies directly. Most included studies were user surveys or descriptive reviews, lacking rigorous experimental data on device performance. The review does not distinguish between static and adjustable devices in its analysis of existing data, as the primary literature rarely does. Some claims about functional limitations (e.g., 90% of ADLs done with one hand) are based on author estimation rather than measured data.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest and received no financial support for this work.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the high usage of passive prostheses as evidence that they are functionally equivalent to active devices for all tasks. They are chosen primarily for comfort and appearance, and their functional capabilities are limited. Patients with high functional demands may still require active prostheses or specific tools.