Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-zklqj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T13:30:42.193Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Utilizing additive manufacturing and gamified virtual simulation in the design of neuroprosthetics to improve pediatric outcomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2019

Albert Manero II Open the ORCID record for Albert Manero II [Opens in a new window] ,
Peter Smith Open the ORCID record for Peter Smith [Opens in a new window] ,
John Sparkman ,
Matt Dombrowski ,
Dominique Courbin ,
Paul Barclay  and
Albert Chi
Albert Manero II*
Affiliation:
Limbitless Solutions, University of Central Florida, 4217 E Plaza Drive, Orlando, FL 32816, USA
Peter Smith
Affiliation:
Limbitless Solutions, University of Central Florida, 4217 E Plaza Drive, Orlando, FL 32816, USA
John Sparkman
Affiliation:
Limbitless Solutions, University of Central Florida, 4217 E Plaza Drive, Orlando, FL 32816, USA
Matt Dombrowski
Affiliation:
Limbitless Solutions, University of Central Florida, 4217 E Plaza Drive, Orlando, FL 32816, USA
Dominique Courbin
Affiliation:
Limbitless Solutions, University of Central Florida, 4217 E Plaza Drive, Orlando, FL 32816, USA
Paul Barclay
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Central Florida, 4000 Central Florida Blvd, Orlando, FL 32816, USA
Albert Chi*
Affiliation:
Division of Trauma, Critical Care and Acute Care Surgery, Department of Surgery, Oregon Health and Science University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239, USA
*
Address all correspondence to Albert Manero II at albert@limbitless-solutions.org; Albert Chi at chia@ohsu.edu
Address all correspondence to Albert Manero II at albert@limbitless-solutions.org; Albert Chi at chia@ohsu.edu
Get access

Abstract

Additive manufacturing used with custom electromyographic sensors has been demonstrated for neuroprosthetic limb manufacturing and is now translating to the clinical environment. These manufacturing methods have dramatically reduced device weight while increasing the capability for multi-finger dexterity. Using wearable electromyography sensors standalone from the prosthetic limb, a new virtual training method has been designed and tested to improve human–machine interaction. This type of training leverages real-time visual feedback to user inputs, supporting improved timing and magnitudes of muscle contractions. The combination of these technologies may provide a stronger affinity between the pediatric patient group and the device.

Information

Type
Research Letters
Information
MRS Communications , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , September 2019 , pp. 941 - 947
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Biddiss, E. and Chau, T.: Upper-limb prosthetics: critical factors in device abandonment. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 86, 977–987 (2007).Google Scholar
2.Parker, S.E., Mai, C.T., Canfield, M.A., Rickard, R., Wang, Y., Meyer, R.E., Anderson, P., Mason, C.A., Collins, J.S., Kirby, R.S., and Correa, A.: For the National Birth Defects Prevention Network. Updated national birth prevalence estimates for selected birth defects in the United States, 2004–2006. Birth Defects Res. A 88, 1008–1016 (2010).10.1002/bdra.20735Google Scholar
3.Stoll, C., Alembik, Y., Dott, B., and Roth, M.-P.: Associated malformations in patients with limb reduction deficiencies. Eur. J. Med. Genet. 53, 286–290 (2010).10.1016/j.ejmg.2010.07.012Google Scholar
4.Stoll, C.: The northeastern France birth defects monitoring system. Prog. Clin. Biol. Res. 163, 157–162 (1985).Google Scholar
5.Buffart, L.M., Roebroeck, M.E., Van Heijningen, V.G., Pesch-Batenburg, J.M., and Stam, H.J.: Evaluation of arm and prosthetic functioning in children with a congenital transverse reduction deficiency of the upper limb. J. Rehabil. Med. 39, 379–386 (2007).10.2340/16501977-0068Google Scholar
6.Tolsma, M., Meeuwisse-de Vries, B., Pesch-Batenburg, J., Rol, M., Arendzen, J., Roebroeck, M., and Stam, H.: Level of functioning of adolescents and young adults with a congenital reduction deficiency of the upper limb. Revalidata 25, 18–21 (2003).Google Scholar
7.Kuyper, M., Breedijk, M., Mulders, A., Post, M., and Prevo, A.: Prosthetic management of children in the Netherlands with upper limb deficiencies. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 25, 228–234 (2001).10.1080/03093640108726606Google Scholar
8.Silcox, D.H., Rooks, M.D., Vogel, R.R., and Fleming, L.L.: Myoelectric prostheses: a long-term follow-up and a study of the use of alternate prostheses. J. Bone Joint Surg. Am. 75, 1781–1789 (1993).Google Scholar
9.Postema, K., Van der Donk, V., Van Limbeek, J., Rijken, R.A., and Poelma, M.: Prosthesis rejection in children with a unilateral congenital arm defect. Clin. Rehabil. 13, 243–249 (1999).Google Scholar
10.Hermansson, L., Eliasson, A., and Engström, I.: Psychosocial adjustment in Swedish children with upper-limb reduction deficiency and a myoelectric prosthetic hand. Acta Paediatr. 94, 479–488 (2005).10.1080/08035250410022512Google Scholar
11.Manero, A., Smith, P., Sparkman, J., Dombrowski, M., Courbin, D., Kester, A., Womack, I., and Chi, A.: Implementation of 3d printing technology in the field of prosthetics: past, present, and future. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16, 1641 (2019).Google Scholar
12.Pousett, B., Lizcano, A., and Raschke, S.U.: An investigation of the structural strength of transtibial sockets fabricated using conventional methods and rapid prototyping techniques. Can. Prosthet. Orthot. J 2 (2019). https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v2i1.31008.Google Scholar
13.Zheng, J.Y., Kalpakjian, C., Larrága-Martínez, M., Chestek, C.A., and Gates, D.H.: Priorities for the design and control of upper limb prostheses: a focus group study. Disabil. Health J. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dhjo.2019.03.009.Google Scholar
14.Fletcher, J. and Tobias, S.: Using computer games and simulations for instruction: a research review. In Proceedings of the Society for Advanced Learning Technology Meeting, Vol. 108, 2006.Google Scholar
15.Sitzmann, T.: A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Pers. Psychol. 64, 489–528 (2011).Google Scholar
16.Hays, R. T.: The effectiveness of instructional games: a literature review and discussion; Technical report, Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division: Orlando, FL, 2005.Google Scholar
17.Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., and Zubek, R.: MDA: a formal approach to game design and game research. In Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game AI, Vol. 4, 2004.Google Scholar
18.Smith, P.A., Dombrowski, M., Buyssens, R., and Barclay, P.: The impact of a custom electromyograph (EMG) controller on player enjoyment of games designed to teach the use of prosthetic arms. Comput. Games J. 7, 131–147 (2018).Google Scholar
19.Phan, M.H., Keebler, J.R., and Chaparro, B.S.: The development and validation of the Game User Experience Satisfaction Scale (GUESS). Hum. Factors 58, 1217–1247 (2016).10.1177/0018720816669646Google Scholar
20.Maroti, P., Varga, P., Abraham, H., Falk, G., Zsebe, T., Meiszterics, Z., Mano, S., Csernatony, Z., Rendeki, S., and Nyitrai, M.: Printing orientation defines anisotropic mechanical properties in additive manufacturing of upper limb prosthetics. Mater. Res. Express 6, 035403 (2018).10.1088/2053-1591/aaf5a9Google Scholar
21.Bennett, D.A., Dalley, S.A., Truex, D., and Goldfarb, M.: A multigrasp hand prosthesis for providing precision and conformal grasps. IEEE-ASME Trans. Mech. 20, 1697–1704 (2014).10.1109/TMECH.2014.2349855Google Scholar
22.Gordon, C. C., Churchill, T., Clauser, C. E., Bradtmiller, B., McConville, J. T., Tebbetts, I., and Walker, R. A.: Anthropometric Survey of US Army Personnel: Summary Statistics, Interim Report for 1988; Technical Report, Anthropology Research Project Inc: Yellow Springs, OH, 1989.Google Scholar
23.Brooke, J.: SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability Evaluation in Industry 189, 4–7 (1996).Google Scholar
24.Roche, A. D., Rehbaum, H., Farina, D., and Aszmann, O. C.: Prosthetic myoelectric control strategies: a clinical perspective. Curr. Surg. Rep. 2, 44 (2014).Google Scholar