Advertisement

Development of Upper Limb Prostheses: Current Progress and Areas for Growth

  • Marlís González-Fernández
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author Marlís González-Fernández, MD, PhD, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 600 N Wolfe St, Phipps 186, Baltimore, MD 21287.
    Affiliations
    Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD
    Search for articles by this author
Published:December 20, 2013DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2013.11.021

      Abstract

      Upper extremity prosthetic technology has significantly changed in recent years. The devices available and those under development are more and more able to approximate the function of the lost limb; however, other challenges remain. This article provides a brief perspective on the most advanced upper limb prostheses available and the challenges present for continued development of the technology.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Ziegler-Graham K.
        • MacKenzie E.J.
        • Ephraim P.L.
        • et al.
        Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008; 89: 422-429
        • Resnik L.
        • Meucci M.R.
        • Lieberman-Klinger S.
        • et al.
        Advanced upper limb prosthetic devices: implications for upper limb prosthetic rehabilitation.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 93: 710-717
        • Resnik L.
        • Klinger S.L.
        • Etter K.
        The DEKA Arm: its features, functionality, and evolution during the Veterans Affairs Study to optimize the DEKA Arm.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2013 Oct 22; ([Epub ahead of print])
      1. John Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory. The program. Available at: http://www.jhuapl.edu/prosthetics/program/default.asp. Accessed November 15, 2013.

      2. John Hopkins Applied Physics Laboratory. Modular prosthetic limb. Available at: http://www.jhuapl.edu/prosthetics/scientists/mpl.asp. Accessed November 15, 2013.

        • Velliste M.
        • Perel S.
        • Spalding M.C.
        • et al.
        Cortical control of a prosthetic arm for self-feeding.
        Nature. 2008; 453: 1098-1101
        • Hochberg L.R.
        • Bacher D.
        • Jarosiewicz B.
        • et al.
        Reach and grasp by people with tetraplegia using a neurally controlled robotic arm.
        Nature. 2012; 485: 372-375
        • Kuiken T.A.
        • Li G.
        • Lock B.A.
        • et al.
        Targeted muscle reinnervation for real-time myoelectric control of multifunction artificial arms.
        JAMA. 2009; 301: 619-628
        • Brånemark R.
        • Brånemark P.I.
        • Rydevik B.L.
        • Myers R.R.
        Osseointegration in skeletal reconstruction and rehabilitation: a review.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001; 38: 175-191
      3. Major Extremity Trauma Research Consortium. Available at: http://metrc.org/researchstudies. Accessed November 15, 2013.