To measure the natural learning processes that take place while learning to use an upper extremity prosthesis.
ID
Source
Brief title
Condition
- Bone and joint therapeutic procedures
Synonym
Research involving
Sponsors and support
Intervention
Outcome measures
Primary outcome
Test: time of execution of the tests tasks and the scores of these tasks in
Index of Functionality.
Training:
Movement kinematics: movement reach time, movement grasp time, velocity of the
reach, peak velocity of the reach, symmetry of the velocity profile, hand
aperture, plateau phase in the hand aperture, velocity of hand opening and
closing, and the timing between the reach and the grasp movement;
Applied grip force;
EMG-signals of the extensors and flexors of the wrist: maximum value and number
of peaks
the pattern of the gaze of the participants: the sequence in which the objects
are fixated during a trial
Secondary outcome
not applicable
Background summary
People with an upper extremity amputation often choose to have fitted a
prosthesis to restore the functionality for as best as possible, but the
rejection rate of prosthetic devices is high, mainly due to a low degree of
functional use (Biddis and Chau, 2007; Dudkiewicz et al., 2004; Kyberd et al.,
1998; Plettenburg, 2002). This functional use can be enhanced by training
(Carter, Torrance and Merry, 1969; Lake, 1997; Weeks, Anderson and Wallace,
2003). We expect that by enhancing the functional use through training, this
raises the overall use of prostheses. The training currently given by
rehabilitation centre is not evidence-based, but mainly based on own
experiences. Therefore, the overall aim of our project is to develop an
evidence-based training protocol for upper extremity prostheses, where we focus
in particular on myoelectric prostheses.
But before an evidence-based training program can be developed, we first have
to know how people learn to use their prosthesis. Therefore, the natural
learning processes during learning have to be determined. Describing the
changes in movement characteristics over learning gives us hints as to where we
can focus on in developing the training protocol.
Study objective
To measure the natural learning processes that take place while learning to use
an upper extremity prosthesis.
Study design
Cohort analytic study
Intervention
One group trains direct grasping, one group trains indirect grasping, one group
trains fixating and one group trains a combination of the three tasks.
Study burden and risks
The experiment is non-therapeutic, the participants have to learn to use a
simulator during 5 training sessions and 4 test days. The measurements are
non-invasive. Therefore, the risks associated with participation can be
considered negligible and the burden can be considered minimal. In this early
stage of discovering natural learning processes we do not want to bother the
few patients who have just been amputated. Therefore, we will use prosthetic
simulators, which mimic real prosthetic devices and can be worn over a sound
arm. With the use of the simulators we can also test more participants than
only the few recently amputated patients.
Kaiserstraße 39
1070 Wenen
Oostenrijk
Kaiserstraße 39
1070 Wenen
Oostenrijk
Listed location countries
Age
Inclusion criteria
Normal or corrected to normal sight
Right-handed
Exclusion criteria
Neurological problems concerning upper extremity or torso
Motor problems concerning upper extremity or torso
Earlier experience with a prosthetic simulator
Design
Recruitment
Followed up by the following (possibly more current) registration
No registrations found.
Other (possibly less up-to-date) registrations in this register
No registrations found.
In other registers
| Register | ID |
|---|---|
| CCMO | NL26993.042.09 |