Cited by 227Prosthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsMuscle activation and electromyography studiesStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery

Differences in myoelectric and body-powered upper-limb prostheses: systematic literature review

Carey, Stephanie L., Lura, Derek J., Highsmith, M. Jason, CP, FAAOP·2015·Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development

Abstract

The choice of a myoelectric or body-powered upper-limb prosthesis can be determined using factors including control, function, feedback, cosmesis, and rejection. Although body-powered and myoelectric control strategies offer unique functions, many prosthesis users must choose one. A systematic review was conducted to determine differences between myoelectric and body-powered prostheses to inform evidence-based clinical practice regarding prescription of these devices and training of users. A search of 9 databases identified 462 unique publications. Ultimately, 31 of them were included and 11 empirical evidence statements were developed. Conflicting evidence has been found in terms of the relative functional performance of body-powered and myoelectric prostheses. Body-powered prostheses have been shown to have advantages in durability, training time, frequency of adjustment, maintenance, and feedback; however, they could still benefit from improvements of control. Myoelectric prostheses have been shown to improve cosmesis and phantom-limb pain and are more accepted for light=intensity work. Currently, evidence is insufficient to conclude that either system provides a significant general advantage. Prosthetic selection should be based on a patient's individual needs and include personal preferences, prosthetic experience, and functional needs. This work demonstrates that there is a lack of empirical evidence regarding functional differences in upper-limb prostheses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1682/jrrd.2014.08.0192

Cites

52 of 52 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?

  • Body-powered prosthetics have advantage over myoelectric-powered ones because an amputee can touch or feel interaction with objects through the body harness operating the prosthesis.

    “Body-powered prosthetics have the advantage over myoelectric-powered ones, because an amputee can touch or feel the interaction with objects through the body harness operating the prosthesis (Carey et al., 2015).”

    From Selectivity and Longevity of Peripheral-Nerve and Machine Interfaces: A Review. (2017) · cites this paper as Carey et al., 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carey, S. L., Lura, D. J., Highsmith, M. J., CP, & FAAOP
Affiliations
  • University of South Florida (US)
  • Florida Gulf Coast University (US)
Venue
Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development
Published
2015
Volume
52
Issue
3
Pages
247-262
ISSN
  • 0742-3241 (ISSN-L)
  • 0748-7711
  • 1938-1352
OpenAlex
W2291960855
Cited by
227
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 16 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 1
FWCI
1.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development (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 › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Keywords
myoelectric prosthesis, body-powered prostheses, upper limb prosthesis, prosthetic control, phantom limb pain, cosmetic outcome, prosthesis acceptance, prosthetic training, prosthetic prescription, functional performance
MeSH terms
Amputees, Arm, Artificial Limbs, Biomedical Engineering, Electromyography, Humans, Prosthesis Design

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