Cited by 95Prosthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsMuscle activation and electromyography studiesNeuroscience and Neural Engineering

Technological Advances in Prosthesis Design and Rehabilitation Following Upper Extremity Limb Loss

Open access
Bates, Taylor J., Fergason, John R., Pierrie, Sarah N.·2020·Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine

Abstract

Purpose of review The complexity of the human extremity, particularly the upper extremity and the hand, allows us to interact with the world. Prosthetists have struggled to recreate the intuitive motor control, light touch sensation, and proprioception of the innate limb in a manner that reflects the complexity of its native form and function. Nevertheless, recent advances in prosthesis technology, surgical innovations, and enhanced rehabilitation appear promising for patients with limb loss who hope to return to their pre-injury level of function. The purpose of this review is to illustrate recent technological advances that are moving us one step closer to the goal of multi-functional, self-identifiable, durable, and intuitive prostheses.Recent findings Surgical advances such as targeted muscle reinnervation, regenerative peripheral nerve interfaces, agonist-antagonist myoneural interfaces, and targeted sensory reinnervation; development of technology designed to restore sensation, such as implanted sensors and haptic devices; and evolution of osseointegrated (bone-anchored) prostheses show great promise. Augmented and virtual reality platforms have the potential to enhance prosthesis design, pre-prosthetic training, incorporation, and use. Emerging technologies move surgeons, rehabilitation physicians, therapists, and prosthetists closer to the goal of creating highly functional prostheses with elevated sensory and motor control. Collaboration between medical teams, scientists, and industry stakeholders will be required to keep pace with patients who require durable, high-functioning prostheses.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s12178-020-09656-6

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Advances in feedback sensors, modern designs, and novel materials have led to broader user acceptance of medical prosthetics.

    “The progression of feedback sensors, modern designs, and novel materials similarly generated broader user-acceptance of medical prosthetics.[19,20]”

    From Flexible Electronics and Devices as Human–Machine Interfaces for Medical Robotics (2022) · cites this paper as [20]

    The Restoring Sensation section links lack of sensory feedback to prosthesis rejection and says tactile feedback can increase a user's identification with a prosthesis. The Introduction and Restoring Sensation sections describe advances in design, sensors, and materials, but do not establish that these advances have generated broader user acceptance. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [14]14. Childress DS. Historical aspects of powered limb prostheses. Prosthet Orthot. 1985;9:2-13.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bates, T. J., Fergason, J. R., & Pierrie, S. N.
Affiliations
Brooke Army Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Pierrie, Sarah N.
Venue
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
Published
2020-06-03
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
485-493
ISSN
  • 1935-973X (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-9748
OpenAlex
W3032409589
Cited by
95
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 7
FWCI
0.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
Keywords
upper limb prosthesis, limb loss, targeted muscle reinnervation, sensory reinnervation, peripheral nerve interfaces, osseointegrated prostheses, haptic feedback, implantable sensors, augmented reality, virtual reality, prosthetic hand, proprioception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review