Abstract
Introduction
The Delft Self-Grasping Hand (SGH) is an adjustable passive hand prosthesis that relies on wrist flexion to adjust the aperture of its grasp. The mechanism requires engagement of the contralateral hand meaning that hand is not available for other tasks. A commercialised version of this prosthesis, known as the mHand Adapt, includes a new release mechanism, which avoids the need to press a release button, and changes to the hand shape. This study is the first of its kind to compare two passive adjustable hand prostheses on the basis of quantitative scoring and contralateral hand involvement.
Methods
10 anatomically intact participants were asked to perform the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP) with the mHand. Functionality and contralateral hand involvement were recorded and compared against SGH data originating from a previous trial involving a nearly identical testing regime.
Results
mHand exhibited higher functionality scores and less contralateral hand interaction time, especially during release-aiding interactions. Additionally, a wider range of tasks could be completed using the mHand than the SGH.
Discussion
Geometric changes make the mHand more capable of manipulating smaller objects. The altered locking mechanism means some tasks can be performed without any contralateral hand involvement and a higher number of tasks do not require contralateral involvement when releasing. Some participants struggled with achieving a good initial grip due to the inability to tighten the grasp once already formed.
Conclusion
The mHand offers the user higher functionality scores with less contralateral hand interaction time and the ability to perform a wider range of tasks. However, there are some design trade-offs which may make it slightly harder to learn to use.
The Delft Self-Grasping Hand (SGH) is an adjustable passive hand prosthesis that relies on wrist flexion to adjust the aperture of its grasp. The mechanism requires engagement of the contralateral hand meaning that hand is not available for other tasks. A commercialised version of this prosthesis, known as the mHand Adapt, includes a new release mechanism, which avoids the need to press a release button, and changes to the hand shape. This study is the first of its kind to compare two passive adjustable hand prostheses on the basis of quantitative scoring and contralateral hand involvement.
Methods
10 anatomically intact participants were asked to perform the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP) with the mHand. Functionality and contralateral hand involvement were recorded and compared against SGH data originating from a previous trial involving a nearly identical testing regime.
Results
mHand exhibited higher functionality scores and less contralateral hand interaction time, especially during release-aiding interactions. Additionally, a wider range of tasks could be completed using the mHand than the SGH.
Discussion
Geometric changes make the mHand more capable of manipulating smaller objects. The altered locking mechanism means some tasks can be performed without any contralateral hand involvement and a higher number of tasks do not require contralateral involvement when releasing. Some participants struggled with achieving a good initial grip due to the inability to tighten the grasp once already formed.
Conclusion
The mHand offers the user higher functionality scores with less contralateral hand interaction time and the ability to perform a wider range of tasks. However, there are some design trade-offs which may make it slightly harder to learn to use.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Article number | e0300469 |
| Number of pages | 16 |
| Journal | PLoS ONE |
| Volume | 19 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2024 |