IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0300469.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A quantitative comparison between the mHand Adapt passive adjustable hand prosthesis and its predecessor, the Delft Self-Grasping Hand

Author

Listed:
  • Spyros L L Krinis
  • Alix Chadwell
  • Laurence Kenney
  • Gerwin Smit

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Spyros L L Krinis & Alix Chadwell & Laurence Kenney & Gerwin Smit, 2024. "A quantitative comparison between the mHand Adapt passive adjustable hand prosthesis and its predecessor, the Delft Self-Grasping Hand," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(3), pages 1-16, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0300469
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0300469
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300469
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0300469&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0300469?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0300469. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.