this article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: segil jl, controzzi m, weir...
DESCRIPTION
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Segil JL, Controzzi M, Weir RF, Cipriani C. Comparative study of state-of- the-art myoelectric controllers for multigrasp prosthetic hands. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(9):1439–54. Slideshow Project DOI: /JRRD JSP Method 7 nondisabled subjects. Used Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP) to compare effectiveness of controllers during activities of daily living using multigrasp artificial hand. Used virtual hand posture matching task to compare controllers when reproducing 6 target postures.TRANSCRIPT
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Segil JL, Controzzi M, Weir RF, Cipriani C. Comparative study of state-of-the-art myoelectric controllers for multigrasp prosthetic hands. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(9):1439–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014JSP
Comparative study of state-of-the-art myoelectric controllers for multigrasp
prosthetic handsJacob L. Segil, MS; Marco Controzzi, PhD;
Richard F. ff. Weir, PhD; Christian Cipriani, PhD
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Segil JL, Controzzi M, Weir RF, Cipriani C. Comparative study of state-of-the-art myoelectric controllers for multigrasp prosthetic hands. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(9):1439–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014JSP
• Aim– Conduct comparative study of 2 finite state machines
and a postural control scheme using virtual and physical assessment procedures.
• Relevance– Myoelectric controller should provide intuitive and
effective human-machine interface that deciphers user intent in real-time and is robust enough to operate in daily life.
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Segil JL, Controzzi M, Weir RF, Cipriani C. Comparative study of state-of-the-art myoelectric controllers for multigrasp prosthetic hands. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(9):1439–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014JSP
Method• 7 nondisabled subjects.• Used Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure
(SHAP) to compare effectiveness of controllers during activities of daily living using multigrasp artificial hand.
• Used virtual hand posture matching task to compare controllers when reproducing 6 target postures.
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Segil JL, Controzzi M, Weir RF, Cipriani C. Comparative study of state-of-the-art myoelectric controllers for multigrasp prosthetic hands. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(9):1439–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014JSP
Results• Performance when using postural control scheme
was significantly better than when using finite state machines during physical assessment when comparing within-subject averages using SHAP % difference metric.
• Virtual assessment described significantly greater completion rates for finite state machines, but movement time tended to be faster for postural control scheme.
This article and any supplementary material should be cited as follows: Segil JL, Controzzi M, Weir RF, Cipriani C. Comparative study of state-of-the-art myoelectric controllers for multigrasp prosthetic hands. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(9):1439–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014
Slideshow ProjectDOI:10.1682/JRRD.2014.01.0014JSP
Conclusion
• Our results substantiate that postural control schemes rival other state-of-the-art myoelectric controllers.