Abstract
Existing prosthetic technologies for people with upper limb amputation are being adopted at moderate rates and unfortunately these devices are often abandoned. The aims of this study were to: 1) understand the current state of satisfaction with upper extremity prostheses, 2) solicit feedback about prosthetic technology and important device design criteria from amputees, clinicians, and device regulators, and 3) compare and contrast these perspectives to identify common or divergent priorities. Twenty-one adults with upper limb loss, 35 clinicians, and 3 regulators completed a survey on existing prosthetic technologies and a conceptual sensorimotor prosthesis driven by implanted myoelectric electrodes with sensory feedback provided via stimulation of dorsal root ganglion. User and clinician ratings of satisfaction with existing prosthetic devices were similar. While amputees, clinicians, and regulators were similarly accepting of technology in general, amputees were most accepting of the proposed implantable sensorimotor prosthesis. Overall, stakeholders valued user-centred outcomes such as individualized task goals, improved quality of life, device reliability, and user safety; a large emphasis was put on these last two outcomes by regulators. The results of this study provide insight into the priorities of amputees, clinicians, and regulators that will inform future upper-limb prosthetic design and clinical trial protocol development.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Research was sponsored by the U.S. Army Research Office and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) was accomplished under Cooperative Agreement Number W911NF-15-2-0016. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Office or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation hereon.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This study was approved by the University of Pittsburgh Institutional Review Board and the Human Research Protection Office of the Army Research Laboratory.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data available upon request.
