Development and real world use of a vibratory haptic feedback system for upper-limb prosthetic users

Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 136-144

  Rosenbaum Chou, Teri ^a   Daly, Wayne ^b   Austin, Ray ^b   Chaubey, Pravin ^c   Boone, David A ^b  

^a Modus Health LLC   (United States)

^b ORTHOCARE INNOVATIONS   (United States)

^c DWFritz Automation Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

accuracy; arm; feedback; grip; Haptic; prosthesis; prosthetic hand; terminal device; vibration; vibrotactile

Indexed keywords

EID: 84984669552     PISSN: 10408800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/JPO.0000000000000107     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Gonzalez J, Soma H, Sekine M, Yu W. Psycho-physiological assessment of a prosthetic hand sensory feedback system based on an auditory display: a preliminary study. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2012;9:33.
2. Schofield JS, Evans KR, Carey JP, Hebert JS. Applications of sensory feedback in motorized upper extremity prosthesis: a review. Expert Rev Med Devices 2014;11(5):499-511.
3. Saunders I, Vijayakumar S. The role of feed-forward and feedback processes for closed-loop prosthesis control. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2011;8:60.
4. Meek SG, Jacobsen SC, Goulding PP. Extended physiologic taction: design and evaluation of a proportional force feedback system. J Rehabil Res Dev 1989;26(3):53-62.
5. Patterson PE, Katz JA. Design and evaluation of a sensory feedback system that provides grasping pressure in a myoelectric hand. J Rehabil Res Dev 1992;29(1):1-8.
6. Kim K, Colgate JE. Haptic feedback enhances grip force control of sEMG-controlled prosthetic hands in targeted reinnervation amputees. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2012;20(6):798-805.
7. Chatterjee A, Chaubey P, Martin J, Thakor N. Testing a prosthetic haptic feedback simulator with an interactive force matching task. J Prosthet Orthot 2008;20(2):27-34.
8. Stepp CE, Matsuoka Y. Vibrotactile sensory substitution for object manipulation: amplitude versus pulse train frequency modulation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2012;20(1):31-37.
9. Stepp CE, Matsuoka Y. Relative to direct haptic feedback, remote vibrotactile feedback improves but slows object manipulation. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2010;2010:2089-2092.
10. Ninu A, Dosen S, Muceli S, et al. Closed-loop control of grasping with a myoelectric hand prosthesis: which are the relevant feedback variables for force control IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2014;22(5):1041-1052.
11. Chaubey P, Rosenbaum-Chou T, Daly W, Boone D. Closed-loop vibratory haptic feedback in upper-limb prosthetic users. J Prosthet Orthot 2014;26(3):120-127.
12. Cipriani C, D'Alonzo M, Carrozza MC. A miniature vibrotactile sensory substitution device for multifingered hand prosthetics. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2012;59(2):400-408.
13. Pylatiuk C, Mounier S, Kargov A, et al. Progress in the development of amultifunctional hand prosthesis. Conf Proc IEEE EngMed Biol Soc 2004;6:4260-4263.
14. Pylatiuk C, Kargov A, Schulz S. Design and evalutation of a low-cost force feedback system for myoelectric prosthetic hands. J Prosthet Orthot 2006;18(2):57-61.
15. Cohen J, Niwa M, Linderman R, et al. A closed-loop tactor frequency control system for vibrotactile feedback. Portland: ACM CHI 2005; 2005.
16. Hermansson LM, Fisher AG, Bernspang B, Eliasson AC. Assessment of capacity for myoelectric control: a new Rasch-built measure of prosthetic hand control. J Rehabil Med 2005;37(3):166-171.
17. Hermansson LM, Bodin L, Eliasson AC. Intra-and inter-rater reliability of the assessment of capacity for myoelectric control. J Rehabil Med 2006;38(2):118-123.
18. Lindner HY, Langius-Eklof A, Hermansson LM. Test-retest reliability and rater agreements of assessment of capacity for myoelectric control version 2.0. J Rehabil Res Dev 2014;51(4): 635-644.