Cited by 257Prosthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsMuscle activation and electromyography studiesAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility

Results of an internet survey of myoelectric prosthetic hand users

Pylatiuk, Christian, Schulz, Stefan, Döderlein, Leonhard·2007·Prosthetics & Orthotics International

Abstract

The results of a survey of 54 persons with upper limb amputations who anonymously completed a questionnaire on an Internet homepage are presented. The survey ran for four years and the participants were divided into groups of females, males, and children. It was found that the most individuals employ their myoelectric hand prosthesis for 8 hours or more. However, the survey also revealed a high level of dissatisfaction with the weight and the grasping speed of the devices. Activities for which prostheses should be useful were stated to include handicrafts, personal hygiene, using cutlery, operation of electronic and domestic devices, and dressing/undressing. Moreover, additional functions, e.g., a force feedback system, independent movements of the thumb, the index finger, and the wrist, and a better glove material are priorities that were identified by the users as being important improvements the users would like to see in myoelectric prostheses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/03093640601061265

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • People reject prostheses over time mainly because of a lack of sensory feedback, uneasiness of cleaning, prosthesis weight, and absence of independent movement of individual prosthesis parts.

    “Yet in practice people reject the prostheses over time, mainly because of a lack of sensory feedback, uneasiness of cleaning, prosthesis weight and the absence of independent movement of individual parts of the prosthesis (Pylatiuk et al., 2007).”

    From Update on Peripheral Nerve Electrodes for Closed-Loop Neuroprosthetics (2018) · cites this paper as Pylatiuk et al., 2007

  • Natural sensory feedback through prostheses is especially desired for those who have lost upper limbs.

    “Particularly for those who have lost upper limbs, natural sensory feedback through the prostheses is especially desired (Biddiss et al., 2007; Pylatiuk et al., 2007; Wijk and Carlsson, 2015).”

    From Selectivity and Longevity of Peripheral-Nerve and Machine Interfaces: A Review. (2017) · cites this paper as Pylatiuk et al., 2007

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pylatiuk, C., Schulz, S., & Döderlein, L.
Affiliations
  • Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE)
  • University Hospital Heidelberg (DE)
Venue
Prosthetics & Orthotics International
Published
2007-12
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
362-370
ISSN
0309-3646 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2111057768
Cited by
257
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 10
FWCI
1.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Prosthetics and Orthotics International (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Assistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Keywords
myoelectric prosthetic hand, upper limb amputation, prosthesis use, user satisfaction, prosthesis weight, force feedback, glove materials
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Age Factors, Amputation, Surgical, Amputation, Traumatic, Artificial Limbs, Child, Electric Stimulation, Female, Hand, Humans, Male, Sex Factors, Patient Satisfaction, Health Care Surveys, Internet

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