Benefits of the Cybathlon 2020 experience for a prosthetic hand user: a case study on the Hannes system.
Case report
Cybathlon
Embodiment
Functionality
Myoelectric prosthesis
Transradial amputees
Upper limb prosthetics
User experience
Journal
Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation
ISSN: 1743-0003
Titre abrégé: J Neuroeng Rehabil
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101232233
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 07 2022
04 07 2022
Historique:
received:
30
09
2021
accepted:
16
06
2022
entrez:
5
7
2022
pubmed:
6
7
2022
medline:
7
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Cybathlon championship aims at promoting the development of prosthetic and assistive devices capable to meet users' needs. This paper describes and analyses possible exploitation outcomes of our team's (REHAB TECH) experience into the Powered Arm Prosthesis Race of the Cybathlon 2020 Global Edition, with the novel prosthetic system Hannes. In detail, we present our analysis on a concurrent evaluation conducted to verify if the Cybathlon training and competition positively influenced pilot's performance and human-technology integration with Hannes, with respect to a non-runner Hannes user. Two transradial amputees were recruited as pilots (Pilot 1 and Pilot 2) for the Cybathlon competition and were given the polyarticulated myoelectric prosthetic hand Hannes. Due to COVID-19 emergency, only Pilot 1 was trained for the race. However, both pilots kept Hannes for Home Use for seven weeks. Before this period, they both participated to the evaluation of functionality, embodiment, and user experience (UX) related to Hannes, which they repeated at the end of the Home Use and right after the competition. We analysed Pilot 1's training and race outcomes, as well as changes in the concurrent evaluation, and compared these results with Pilot 2's ones. The Cybathlon training gradually improved Pilot 1's performances, leading to the sixth place with a single error in task 5. In the parallel evaluation, both pilots had an overall improvement over time, whereas Pilot 2 experienced a deterioration of embodiment. In detail, Pilot 1, who followed the training and raced the Cybathlon, improved in greater way. Hannes demonstrated to be a valuable competitor and to perform grasps with human-like behaviors. The higher improvements of Pilot 1, who actively participated in the Cybathlon, in terms of functionality, embodiment and UX, may depend on his training and engagement in the effort of achieving a successful user-prosthesis interaction during the competition. Tasks based on Cybathlon's ones could improve the training phase of a prosthetic user, stimulating dexterity, prosthetic integration, and user perception towards the prosthesis. Likewise, timed races or competitions could facilitate and accelerate the learning phase, improving the efficiency and efficacy of the process.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Cybathlon championship aims at promoting the development of prosthetic and assistive devices capable to meet users' needs. This paper describes and analyses possible exploitation outcomes of our team's (REHAB TECH) experience into the Powered Arm Prosthesis Race of the Cybathlon 2020 Global Edition, with the novel prosthetic system Hannes. In detail, we present our analysis on a concurrent evaluation conducted to verify if the Cybathlon training and competition positively influenced pilot's performance and human-technology integration with Hannes, with respect to a non-runner Hannes user.
METHODS
Two transradial amputees were recruited as pilots (Pilot 1 and Pilot 2) for the Cybathlon competition and were given the polyarticulated myoelectric prosthetic hand Hannes. Due to COVID-19 emergency, only Pilot 1 was trained for the race. However, both pilots kept Hannes for Home Use for seven weeks. Before this period, they both participated to the evaluation of functionality, embodiment, and user experience (UX) related to Hannes, which they repeated at the end of the Home Use and right after the competition. We analysed Pilot 1's training and race outcomes, as well as changes in the concurrent evaluation, and compared these results with Pilot 2's ones.
RESULTS
The Cybathlon training gradually improved Pilot 1's performances, leading to the sixth place with a single error in task 5. In the parallel evaluation, both pilots had an overall improvement over time, whereas Pilot 2 experienced a deterioration of embodiment. In detail, Pilot 1, who followed the training and raced the Cybathlon, improved in greater way.
CONCLUSION
Hannes demonstrated to be a valuable competitor and to perform grasps with human-like behaviors. The higher improvements of Pilot 1, who actively participated in the Cybathlon, in terms of functionality, embodiment and UX, may depend on his training and engagement in the effort of achieving a successful user-prosthesis interaction during the competition. Tasks based on Cybathlon's ones could improve the training phase of a prosthetic user, stimulating dexterity, prosthetic integration, and user perception towards the prosthesis. Likewise, timed races or competitions could facilitate and accelerate the learning phase, improving the efficiency and efficacy of the process.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35787721
doi: 10.1186/s12984-022-01046-y
pii: 10.1186/s12984-022-01046-y
pmc: PMC9252572
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
68Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Cognition. 2008 Jun;107(3):978-98
pubmed: 18262508
JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2020 Nov 3;8(11):e16973
pubmed: 33141093
Front Neurorobot. 2021 Jul 09;15:689717
pubmed: 34305564
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2007 Sep;31(3):236-57
pubmed: 17979010
Gait Posture. 2014 Jun;40(2):305-9
pubmed: 24831116
Front Psychol. 2018 Sep 12;9:1688
pubmed: 30258382
Sci Robot. 2020 Sep 23;5(46):
pubmed: 32967990
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 May;87(5):1038-46
pubmed: 15866967
Front Neurorobot. 2021 Jun 09;15:675657
pubmed: 34177510
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2015;52(3):247-62
pubmed: 26230500
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Jan;44(1):30-9
pubmed: 24175606
Sci Rep. 2021 Mar 3;11(1):5029
pubmed: 33658576
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 May;85(5):730-6
pubmed: 15129396
Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30(11):871-83
pubmed: 17852212
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2016 May 31;13(1):49
pubmed: 27246601
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2016 Feb;40(1):109-16
pubmed: 25336050
Phys Ther Sport. 2015 Aug;16(3):236-41
pubmed: 25869425
Am J Occup Ther. 1985 Jun;39(6):386-91
pubmed: 3160243
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2003 Dec;27(3):191-206
pubmed: 14727700
Psychol Sci. 2010 Jan;21(1):55-7
pubmed: 20424023
Front Neurorobot. 2021 Aug 27;15:683653
pubmed: 34557082
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022 Mar 28;19(1):37
pubmed: 35346251