Kinematic analysis of impairments and compensatory motor behavior during prosthetic grasping in below-elbow amputees (bibtex)
by , , , , , ,
Bibtex Entry:
  author      = {Touillet, A. and Gouzien, A. and Badin M. and Herbe. p and Martinet, N. and Jarrassé, N and Roby-Brami, A.},
  journal     = {{PLOS One}},
  title       = {{Kinematic analysis of impairments and compensatory motor behavior during prosthetic grasping in below-elbow amputees}},
  year        = {2022},
  abstract    = {After a major upper limb amputation, the use of myoelectric prosthesis as assistive devices is possible. However, these prostheses remain quite difficult to control for grasping and manipulation of daily life objects. The aim of the present observational case study is to document the kinematics of grasping in a group of 10 below-elbow amputated patients fitted with a myoelectric prosthesis in order to describe and better understand their compensatory strategies. They performed a grasping to lift task toward 3 objects (a mug, a cylinder and a cone) placed at two distances within the reaching area in front of the patients. The kinematics of the trunk and upper-limb on the non-amputated and prosthetic sides were recorded with 3 electromagnetic Polhemus sensors placed on the hand, the forearm (or the corresponding site on the prosthesis) and the ipsilateral acromion. The 3D position of the elbow joint and the shoulder and elbow angles were calculated thanks to a preliminary calibration of the sensor position. We examined first the effect of side, distance and objects with non-parametric statistics. Prosthetic grasping was characterized by severe temporo-spatial impairments consistent with previous clinical or kinematic observations. The grasping phase was prolonged and the reaching and grasping components uncoupled. The 3D hand displacement was symmetrical in average, but with some differences according to the objects. Compensatory strategies involved the trunk and the proximal part of the upper-limb, as shown by a greater 3D displacement of the elbow for close target and a greater forward displacement of the acromion, particularly for far targets. The hand orientation at the time of grasping showed marked side differences with a more frontal azimuth, and a more “thumb-up” roll. The variation of hand orientation with the object on the prosthetic side, suggested that the lack of finger and wrist mobility imposed some adaptation of hand pose relative to the object. The detailed kinematic analysis allows more insight into the mechanisms of the compensatory strategies that could be due to both increased distal or proximal kinematic constraints. A better knowledge of those compensatory strategies is important for the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders and the development of innovative prosthetics.},
  category    = {ACLI},
  crac        = {n},
  doi         = {10.1371/journal.pone.0277917},
  file        = {:http\://;:http\:// image;},
  hal         = {y},
  hal_id      = {hal-03863792},
  hal_version = {v1},
Powered by bibtexbrowser