
In
medicine, a prosthesis, (from
Ancient Greek prósthesis, "addition, application,
attachment")[1]
is an artificial device that replaces a missing
body
part lost through trauma, disease, or congenital conditions.
Types
The main types of prosthesis,
craniofacial and
somato (body), can be divided further by anatomical region.
Craniofacial prostheses include intra-oral and extra-oral
prostheses. Extra-oral prostheses are further divided into hemifacial,
auricular (ear),
nasal,
orbital and
ocular. Intra-oral prostheses include dental prostheses such as
dentures,
obturators, and
dental implants. Somato prostheses include
breast and
limb prostheses.
Breast prostheses include full breast devices and
nipple prostheses. Limb Prostheses include upper extremity and lower
extremity prostheses. Upper extremity prostheses are used at varying
levels of amputation: shoulder disarticulation,
transhumeral, elbow disarticulation,
transradial, wrist disarticulation, full hand, partial hand, finger,
partial finger. Lower extremity prostheses are also used at varying
levels of amputation. These include hip disarticulation,
transfemoral, knee disarticulation,
transtibial, symes, foot, partial foot, and toe. The type of
prostheses needed will be designed and assembled according to the
patient's appearance and functional needs. For instance, a patient may
need a transradial prosthesis, but need to choose between an aesthetic
functional device, a myoelectric device, a body-powered device, or an
activity specific device. Depending on the patient's funding situation,
she may have the option to choose more than one device.
A
transhumeral prosthesis is an artificial limb that replaces an arm
missing above the elbow. Transhumeral amputees experience some of the
same problems as transfemoral amputees, due to the similar complexities
associated with the movement of the elbow. This makes mimicking the
correct motion with an artificial limb very difficult. In the prosthetic
industry a trans-humeral prosthesis is often referred to as a "AE" or
above the elbow prothesis.
A
transradial prosthesis is an artificial limb that replaces an arm
missing below the elbow. Two main types of prosthetics are available.
Cable operated limbs work by attaching a harness and cable around the
opposite shoulder of the damaged arm. The other form of prosthetics
available are
myoelectric arms. These work by sensing, via
electrodes, when the muscles in the
upper arm
moves, causing an artificial hand to open or close. In the prosthetic
industry a trans-radial prosthetic arm is often referred to as a "BE" or
below elbow prosthesis.
A
transfemoral prosthesis is an artificial limb that replaces a leg
missing above the knee. Transfemoral amputees can have a very difficult
time regaining normal movement. In general, a transfemoral amputee must
use approximately 80% more energy to walk than a person with two whole
legs.[2]
This is due to the complexities in movement associated with the knee. In
newer and more improved designs, hydraulics, carbon fiber, mechanical
linkages, motors, computer microprocessors, and innovative combinations
of these technologies are employed to give more control to the user. In
the prosthetic industry a trans-femoral prosthetic leg is often referred
to as an "AK" or above the knee prosthesis.[3]
A
transtibial prosthesis is an artificial limb that replaces a leg
missing below the knee. Transtibial amputees are usually able to regain
normal movement more readily than someone with a transfemoral
amputation, due in large part to retaining the knee, which allows for
easier movement. Lower extremity prosthetics describes artificially
replaced limbs located at the hip level or lower. The two main
subcategories of lower extremity prosthetic devices are 1.trans-tibial
(any amputation transecting the tibia bone or a congenital anomaly
resulting in a tibial deficiency) and 2.trans-femoral (any amputation
transecting the femur bone or a congenital anomaly resulting in a
femoral deficiency). In the prosthetic industry a trans-tibial
prosthetic leg is often referred to as a "BK" or below the knee
prosthesis while the trans-femoral prosthetic leg is often referred to
as an "AK" or above the knee prosthesis.
History
Prosthetic toe from ancient Egypt
Prosthetics have been mentioned throughout history. The earliest
recorded mention is the warrior queen
Vishpala in the
Rigveda.[4]
The Egyptians were early pioneers of the idea, as shown by the wooden
toe found on a body from the
New Kingdom.[5]
Roman bronze
crowns have also been found, but their use could have been more
aesthetic than medical.[6]
Another early mention of a prosthetic comes from the Greek historian
Herodotus, who tells the story of
Hegesistratus, a Greek
diviner who cut off his own foot to escape his
Spartan
captors and replaced it with a wooden one.[7]
Pliny the Elder also recorded that a Roman general who had his arm
cut off had an iron one made to hold his shield up when he returned to
battle. A famous and quite refined[8]
historical prosthetic arm was that of
Götz von Berlichingen, made at the beginning of the 16th century.
An artificial limbs factory in 1941
Around the same time,
François de la Noue is also reported to have had an iron hand, as
is, in the 1600s century,
René-Robert Cavalier de la Salle.[9]
During the Middle Ages, prosthetics remained quite basic in form.
Debilitated knights would be fitted with prosthetics so they could hold
up a shield. Only the wealthy could afford anything that would assist in
daily life. During the Renaissance, prosthetics developed with the use
of iron, steel, copper, and wood. Functional prosthetics began to make
an appearance in the 1500s.
Götz von Berlichingen, a German mercenary, developed a pair of iron
hands that could be moved by a series of catches and springs. An Italian
surgeon recorded the existence of an amputee who had an arm that allowed
him to remove his hat, open his purse, and sign his name.[10]
Improvement in amputation surgery and prosthetic design came at the
hands of Ambroise Paré. Among his inventions was an above-knee device
that was a kneeling peg leg and foot prosthesis with a fixed position,
adjustable harness, and knee lock control. The functionality of his
advancements showed how future prosthetics could develop.
Other major improvements before the modern era:
-
Pieter Verduyn - First nonlocking below-knee (BK) prosthesis.
-
James Potts - Prosthesis made of a wooden shank and socket, a
steel knee joint and an articulated foot that was controlled by
catgut tendons from the knee to the ankle. Came to be known as
“Anglesey Leg” or “Selpho Leg.”
- Sir
James Syme - A new method of ankle amputation that did not
involve amputating at the thigh.
-
Benjamin Palmer - Improved upon the Selpho leg. Added an
anterior spring and concealed tendons to simulate natural-looking
movement.
-
Dubois Parmlee – Created prosthetic with a suction socket,
polycentric knee, and multi-articulated foot.
-
Marcel Desoutter &
Charles Desoutter – First aluminum prosthesis[11]
At the end of World War II, the NAS (National Academy of Sciences)
began to advocate better research and development of prosthetics.
Through government funding, a research and development program was
developed within the Army, Navy, Air Force, and the Veterans
Administration.
Lower
extremity modern history
Socket technology for lower extremity limbs saw a revolution of
advancement during the 1980s when John Sabolich C.P.O., invented the
Contoured Adducted Trochanteric-Controlled Alignment Method (CATCAM)
socket, later to evolve into the Sabolich Socket. He followed the
direction of Ivan Long and Ossur Christensen as they developed
alternatives to the quadrilateral socket, which in turn followed the
open ended plug socket, created from wood.[12]
The advancement was due to the difference in the socket to patient
contact model. Prior, sockets were made in the shape of a square shape
with no specialized containment for muscular tissue. New designs thus
help to lock in the bony anatomy, locking it into place and distributing
the weight evenly over the existing limb as well as the musculature of
the patient. Ischial containment is well known and used today by many
prosthetist to help in patient care. Variation’s of the ischial
containment socket thus exists and each socket is tailored to the
specific needs of the patient. Others who contributed to socket
development and changes over the years include Tim Staats, Chris Hoyt,
and Frank Gottschalk. Gottschalk disputed the efficacy of the CAT-CAM
socket- insisting the surgical procedure done by the amputation surgeon
was most important to prepare the amputee for good use of a prosthesis
of any type socket design.[13]
The first microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees became available
in the early 1990s. The Intelligent Prosthesis was first commercially
available microprocessor controlled prosthetic knee. It was released by
Chas. A. Blatchford & Sons, Ltd., of Great Britain, in 1993 and made
walking with the prosthesis feel and look more natural.[14]
An improved version was released in 1995 by the name Intelligent
Prosthesis Plus. Blatchford released another prosthesis, the Adaptive
Prosthesis, in 1998. The Adaptive Prosthesis utilized hydraulic
controls, pneumatic controls, and a microprocessor to provide the
amputee with a gait that was more responsive to changes in walking
speed. Cost analysis reveals that a sophisticated above knee prosthesis
will be in the neighborhood of $1 million in 45 years, given only annual
cost of living adjustments.[15]
Current technology/manufacturing
Over the years there have been significant advancements in artificial
limbs. New plastics and other materials, such as
carbon fiber, have allowed artificial limbs to be stronger and
lighter, limiting the amount of extra energy necessary to operate the
limb. This is especially important for transfemoral amputees. Additional
materials have allowed artificial limbs to look much more realistic,
which is important to transradial and transhumeral amputees because they
are more likely to have the artificial limb exposed.[16]
Manufacturing a prosthetic finger
In addition to new materials, the use of electronics has become very
common in artificial limbs. Myoelectric limbs, which control the limbs
by converting muscle movements to electrical signals, have become much
more common than cable operated limbs. Myoelectric signals are picked up
by electrodes, the signal gets integrated and once it exceeds a certain
threshold, the prosthetic limb control signal is triggered which is why
inherently, all myoelectric controls lag. Conversely, cable control is
immediate and physical, and through that offers a certain degree of
direct force feedback that myoelectric control does not. Computers are
also used extensively in the manufacturing of limbs.
Computer Aided Design and Computer Aided Manufacturing are often
used to assist in the design and manufacture of artificial limbs.[16]
Most modern artificial limbs are attached to the stump of the amputee
by belts and cuffs or by
suction.
The stump either directly fits into a socket on the prosthetic, or—more
commonly today—a liner is used that then is fixed to the socket either
by vacuum (suction sockets) or a pin lock. Liners are soft and by that,
they can create a far better suction fit than hard sockets. Silicone
liners can be obtained in standard sizes, mostly with a circular (round)
cross section, but for any other stump shape, custom liners can be made.
The socket is custom made to fit the residual limb and to distribute the
forces of the artificial limb across the area of the stump (rather than
just one small spot), which helps reduce wear on the stump. The custom
socket is created by taking a plaster cast of the stump or, more
commonly today, of the liner worn over the stump, and then making a mold
from the plaster cast. Newer methods include laser guided measuring
which can be input directly to a computer allowing for a more
sophisticated design.
One problem with the stump and socket attachment is that a bad fit
will reduce the area of contact between the stump and socket or liner,
and increase pockets between stump skin and socket or liner. Pressure
then is higher, which can be painful. Air pockets can allow sweat to
accumulate that can soften the skin. Ultimately, this is a frequent
cause for itchy skin rashes. Further down the road, it can cause
breakdown of the skin.[2]
Artificial limbs are typically manufactured using the following
steps:[16]
- Measurement of the stump
- Measurement of the body to determine the size required for the
artificial limb
- Fitting of a silicone liner
- Creation of a model of the liner worn over the stump
- Formation of
thermoplastic sheet around the model – This is then used to test
the fit of the prosthetic
- Formation of permanent socket
- Formation of plastic parts of the artificial limb – Different
methods are used, including
vacuum forming and
injection molding
- Creation of metal parts of the artificial limb using
die casting
- Assembly of entire limb
Body-powered arms
Current high tech allows body powered arms to weigh around half to
only a third of the weight that a myoelectric arm has.
Sockets
Current body powered arms contain sockets that are built from hard
epoxy or carbon fiber. These sockets or "interfaces" can be made more
comfortable by lining them with a softer, compressible foam material
that provides padding for the bone prominences. A self suspending or
supra-condylar socket design is useful for those with short to mid range
below elbow absence. Longer limbs may require the use of a locking
roll-on type inner liner or more complex harnessing to help augment
suspension.
Wrists
Wrist units are either screw-on connectors featuring the UNF 1/2-20
thread (USA) or quick release connector, of which there are different
models.
Voluntary opening and voluntary closing
Two types of body powered systems exist, voluntary opening "pull to
open" and voluntary closing "pull to close". Virtually all "split hook"
prostheses operate with a voluntary opening type system.
More modern "prehensors" called GRIPS utilize voluntary closing
closing systems. The differences are significant. Users of voluntary
opening systems rely on elastic bands or springs for gripping force,
while users of voluntary closing systems rely on their own body power
and energy to create gripping force.
Voluntary closing users can generate prehensive forces equivalent to
the normal hand, upwards to or exceeding one hundred pounds. Voluntary
closing GRIPS require constant tension to grip, like a human hand, and
in that property they do come closer to matching human hand performance.
Voluntary opening split hook users are limited to forces their rubber or
springs can generate which usually is below twenty pounds.
Feedback
An additional difference exists in the biofeedback created that
allows the user to "feel" what is being held. Voluntary opening systems
once engaged provide the holding force so that they operate like a
passive vice at the end of the arm. No gripping feedback is provided
once the hook has closed around the object being held. Voluntary closing
systems provide directly proportional control and biofeedback so that
the user can feel how much force that they are applying.
Terminal devices
Terminal devices contain a range of hooks, prehensors, hands or other
devices.
Hooks
Voluntary opening split hook systems are simple, convenient, light,
robust, versatile and relatively affordable. Hooks obviously do not
match human hand in both appearance and overall versatility.
However, a hook's material tolerances can also exceed and surpass the
human hand for mechanical stress (one can use a hook to slice open boxes
or as a hammer whereas same is not possible with a hand), for thermal
stability (one can use a hook to grip items from boiling water, to turn
meat on a grill, to hold a match until it has burned down completely)
and for chemical hazards (as a metal hook withstands acids or lye, and
does not react to solvents as a prosthetic glove or human skin does).
Hands
Prosthetic hands are available in both voluntary opening and
voluntary closing versions and because of their more complex mechanics
and cosmetic glove covering require a relatively large activation force,
which, depending on the type of harness used, may be uncomfortable.[17]
Commercial providers, materials
Hosmer and Otto Bock are major commercial hook providers. Mechanical
hands are sold by Hosmer and Otto Bock as well; the Becker Hand is still
manufactured by the Becker family. Prosthetic hands may be fitted with
standard stock or custom made cosmetic looking silicone gloves. But
regular work gloves may be worn as well. Other terminal devices include
the V2P Prehensor, a versatile robust gripper that allows customers to
modify aspects of it, Texas Assist Devices (with a whole assortment of
tools) and TRS that offers a range of terminal devices for sports. Cable
harnesses can be built using aircraft steel cables, ball hinges and self
lubricating cable sheaths.
Actor
Owen Wilson gripping the myoelectric prosthetic arm of a
United States Marine
Lower
extremity prosthetics
Lower extremity prosthetics describes artificially replaced limbs
located at the hip level or lower. The two main subcategories of lower
extremity prosthetic devices are 1.trans-tibial (any amputation
transecting the tibia bone or a congenital anomaly resulting in a tibial
deficiency) and 2.trans-femoral (any amputation transecting the femur
bone or a congenital anomaly resulting in a femoral deficiency). In the
prosthetic industry a trans-tibial prosthetic leg is often referred to
as a "BK" or below the knee prosthesis while the trans-femoral
prosthetic leg is often referred to as an "AK" or above the knee
prosthesis.
Other, less prevalent lower extremity cases include the following:
- Hip disarticulations - This usually refers to when an amputee or
congenitally challenged patient has either an amputation or anomaly
at or in close proximity to the hip joint.
- Knee disarticulations - This usually refers to an amputation
through the knee disarticulating the femur from the tibia.
- Symes - This is an ankle disarticulation while preserving the
heel pad.
C-Leg knee
prosthesis
Two different models of the C-Leg prosthesis
The
Otto
Bock Orthopedic Industry introduced the C-Leg during the
World Congress on Orthopedics in Nuremberg in 1997. The company began
marketing the C-Leg in the United States in 1999.[18]
Other microprocessor-controlled knee prostheses include Ossur's Rheo
Knee, released in 2005, the Power Knee by
Ossur, introduced in 2006, the Plié Knee from Freedom Innovations[19]
and DAW Industries’ Self Learning Knee (SLK).[20]
The idea was originally developed by Kelly James, a Canadian
engineer, at the
University of Alberta.[21]
The C-Leg uses
hydraulic cylinders to control the flexing of the knee. Sensors send
signals to the microprocessor that analyzes these signals, and
communicates what resistance the hydraulic cylinders should supply.
C-Leg is an abbreviation of 3C100, the model number of the original
prosthesis, but has continued to be applied to all Otto Bock
microprocessor-controlled knee prostheses. The C-Leg functions through
various technological devices incorporated into the components of the
prosthesis. The C-Leg uses a knee-angle sensor to measure the angular
position and
angular velocity of the flexing joint. Measurements are taken up to
fifty times a second. The knee-angle sensor is located directly at the
axis of rotation of the knee.[22]
Moment sensors are located in the tube adapter at the base of the
C-Leg. These moment sensors use multiple
strain gauges to determine where the force is being applied to the
knee, from the foot, and the magnitude of that force.[22]
The C-Leg controls the resistance to rotation and extension of the
knee using a hydraulic cylinder. Small valves control the amount of
hydraulic fluid that can pass into and out of the cylinder, thus
regulating the extension and compression of a piston connected to the
upper section of the knee.[15]
The microprocessor receives signals from its sensors to determine the
type of motion being employed by the amputee. The microprocessor then
signals the hydraulic cylinder to act accordingly. The microprocessor
also records information concerning the motion of the amputee that can
be downloaded onto a computer and analyzed. This information allows the
user to make better use of the prosthetic.[22]
The C-Leg is powered by a
lithium-ion battery housed inside the prosthesis near the knee
joint. On a full charge, the C-leg can operate for up to 45 hours,
depending on the intensity of use. A charging port located on the front
of the knee joint can be connected to a charging cable plugged directly
into a standard outlet.[23]
A "pigtail" charging port adapter permits the relocation of the charging
port to a location more accessible when the prosthesis has a cosmetic
cover applied. The charger cord has lights that allow the user to
observe the level of charge when connected to the knee. A 12 volt car
charger adapter can also be purchased.
The C-Leg provides certain advantages over conventional mechanical
knee prostheses. It provides an approximation to an amputee’s natural
gait. The C-Leg allows amputees to walk at near walking speed.
Variations in speed are also possible and are taken into account by
sensors and communicated to the microprocessor, which adjusts to these
changes accordingly. It also enables the amputees to walk down stairs
with a step-over-step approach, rather than the one step at a time
approach used with mechanical knees.[18]
The C-Leg’s ability to respond to sensor readings can help amputees
recover from stumbles without the knee buckling.[24]
However, the C-Leg has some significant drawbacks that impair its use.
The C-Leg is susceptible to water damage and thus great care must be
taken to ensure that the prosthesis remains dry. Otto Bock recommends
that each amputee use the C-Leg for up to two months before the system
can fully become accustomed to the individual’s unique gait. Becoming
accustomed to the C-Leg is especially difficult when walking downhill,
and amputees should seek help while becoming familiar with the system to
avoid injury.[18]
A wide range of amputees can make use of the C-Leg; however, some
people are more suited to this prosthesis than others. The C-Leg is
designed for use on people who have undergone transfemoral amputation,
or amputation above the knee. The C-Leg can be used by amputees with
either single or bilateral limb amputations. In the case of bilateral
amputations, the application of C-Legs must be closely monitored. In
some cases, those who have undergone hip disarticulation amputations can
be candidates for a C-Leg.[25]
The prosthesis is recommended for amputees that vary their walking
speeds and can reach over 3 miles per hour; however, it cannot be used
for running. The C-Leg is practical for upwards of 3 miles daily, and
can be used on uneven ground, slopes, or stairs. Active amputees, such
as bikers and rollerbladers may find the C-Leg suited to their needs.
Certain physical requirements must be met for C-Leg use. The amputee
must have satisfactory cardiovascular and pulmonary health. The balance
and strength of the amputee must be sufficient to take strides while
using prosthesis. The C-Leg is designed to support amputees weighing up
to 275 pounds.[25]
Myoelectric
A myoelectric prosthesis uses
electromyography signals or potentials from voluntarily contracted
muscles within a person's residual limb on the surface of the skin to
control the movements of the prosthesis, such as elbow
flexion/extension, wrist supination/pronation (rotation) or hand
opening/closing of the fingers. A prosthesis of this type utilizes the
residual neuro-muscular system of the human body to control the
functions of an electric powered prosthetic hand, wrist or elbow. This
is as opposed to an electric switch prosthesis, which requires straps
and/or cables actuated by body movements to actuate or operate switches
that control the movements of a prosthesis or one that is totally
mechanical. It is not clear whether those few prostheses that provide
feedback signals to those muscles are also myoelectric in nature. It has
a self suspending socket with pick up electrodes placed over flexors and
extensors for the movement of flexion and extension respectively.
The first commercial myoelectric arm was developed in 1964 by the
Central Prosthetic Research Institute of the
USSR, and distributed by the
Hangar Limb Factory of the
UK.[26][27]
Robotic prostheses
In order for a robotic prosthetic limb to work, it must have several
components to integrate it into the body's function:
Biosensors detect signals from the user's nervous or muscular
systems. It then relays this information to a controller located inside
the device, and processes feedback from the limb and actuator (e.g.,
position, force) and sends it to the controller. Examples include wires
that detect electrical activity on the skin, needle electrodes implanted
in muscle, or solid-state electrode arrays with nerves growing through
them. One type of these biosensors are employed in
myoelectric prosthesis.
Mechanical sensors process aspects affecting the device (e.g., limb
position, applied force, load) and relay this information to the
biosensor or controller. Examples include force meters and
accelerometers.
The
controller is connected to the user's nerve and muscular systems and
the device itself. It sends intention commands from the user to the
actuators of the device, and interprets feedback from the mechanical and
biosensors to the user. The controller is also responsible for the
monitoring and control of the movements of the device.
An
actuator mimics the actions of a muscle in producing force and
movement. Examples include a motor that aids or replaces original muscle
tissue.
Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) is a technique in which
motor nerves which previously controlled
muscles
on an amputated limb are
surgically rerouted such that they reinnervate a small region of a
large, intact muscle, such as the
pectoralis major. As a result, when a patient thinks about moving
the thumb of his missing hand, a small area of muscle on his chest will
contract instead. By placing sensors over the reinervated muscle, these
contractions can be made to control movement of an appropriate part of
the robotic prosthesis.[28][29]
An emerging variant of this technique is called targeted sensory
reinnervation (TSR). This procedure is similar to TMR, except that
sensory nerves are surgically rerouted to
skin on the
chest, rather than motor nerves rerouted to muscle. The patient then
feels any sensory stimulus on that area of the chest, such as pressure
or temperature, as if it were occurring on the area of the amputated
limb which the nerve originally innervated. In the future, artificial
limbs could be built with sensors on fingertips or other important
areas. When a stimulus, such as pressure or temperature, activated these
sensors, an electrical signal would be sent to an actuator, which would
produce a similar stimulus on the "rewired" area of chest skin. The user
would then feel that stimulus as if it were occurring on an appropriate
part of the artificial limb.[28]
Recently, robotic limbs have improved in their ability to take
signals from
the human brain and translate those signals into motion in the
artificial limb.
DARPA,
the Pentagon’s research division, is working to make even more
advancements in this area. Their desire is to create an artificial limb
that ties directly into the
nervous system.[30]
Robotic arms
Advancements in the processors used in myoelectric arms has allowed
to make gains in fine tuned control of the prosthetic. The
Boston Digital Arm is a recent artificial limb that has taken
advantage of these more advanced processors. The arm allows movement in
five axes and allows the arm to be programmed for a more customized
feel. Recently the
i-Limb hand, invented in Edinburgh, Scotland, by
David
Gow has become the first commercially available hand prosthesis with
five individually powered digits. The hand also possesses a manually
rotatable thumb which is operated passively by the user and allows the
hand to grip in precision, power and key grip modes.[31]
Raymond Edwards,
Limbless Association Acting CEO, was the first amputee to be fitted
with the i-LIMB by the
National Health Service in the UK.[32]
The hand, manufactured by "Touch
Bionics"[33]
of Scotland (a
Livingston company), went on sale on 18 July 2007 in Britain.[34]
It was named alongside the Large Hadron Collider in
Time magazine's top fifty innovations.[35]
Another neural prosthetic is
Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory
Proto 1. Besides the
Proto 1, the university also finished the
Proto 2
in 2010.[36]
Early in 2013, Max Ortiz Catalan and Rickard Brånemark of the
Chalmers University of Technology, and Sahlgrenska University Hospital
in Sweden, succeeded in making the first robotic arm which is
mind-controlled and can be permanently attached to the body (using
osseointegration).[37][38][39]
Robotic legs
Robotic legs exist too: the
Argo Medical Technologies
ReWalk
is an example or a recent robotic leg, targeted to replace the
wheelchair. It is marketed as a "robotic pants".[40]
I
Attachment to
the body
Most prostheses can be attached to the exterior of the body, in a
non-permanent way. Some others however can be attached in a permanent
way. One such example are exoprostheses (see below).
Direct bone attachment / osseointegration
Osseointegration is a new method of attaching the artificial limb to
the body. This method is also sometimes referred to as
exoprosthesis (attaching an artificial limb to the bone), or
endo-exoprosthesis.
The stump and socket method can cause significant pain in the
amputee, which is why the direct bone attachment has been explored
extensively. The method works by inserting a titanium bolt into the bone
at the end of the stump. After several months the
bone attaches itself to the titanium bolt and an abutment is
attached to the titanium bolt. The abutment extends out of the stump and
the (removable) artificial limb is then attached to the abutment. Some
of the benefits of this method include the following:
- Better muscle control of the prosthetic.
- The ability to wear the prosthetic for an extended period of
time; with the stump and socket method this is not possible.
- The ability for transfemoral amputees to drive a car.
The main disadvantage of this method is that amputees with the direct
bone attachment cannot have large impacts on the limb, such as those
experienced during jogging, because of the potential for the bone to
break.[2]
Cosmesis
Cosmetic prosthesis has long been used to disguise injuries and
disfigurements. With advances in modern technology,
cosmesis, the creation of lifelike limbs made from
silicone or
PVC has been made possible. Such prosthetics, such as artificial
hands, can now be made to mimic the appearance of real hands, complete
with freckles, veins, hair, fingerprints and even tattoos. Custom-made
cosmeses are generally more expensive (costing thousands of US dollars,
depending on the level of detail), while standard cosmeses come
ready-made in various sizes, although they are often not as realistic as
their custom-made counterparts. Another option is the custom-made
silicone cover, which can be made to match a person's skin tone but not
details such as freckles or wrinkles. Cosmeses are attached to the body
in any number of ways, using an adhesive, suction, form-fitting,
stretchable skin, or a skin sleeve.
Cognition
Unlike neuromotor prostheses, neurocognitive prostheses would sense
or modulate neural function in order to physically reconstitute or
augment cognitive processes such as
executive function,
attention, language, and memory. No neurocognitive prostheses are
currently available but the development of implantable neurocognitive
brain-computer interfaces has been proposed to help treat conditions
such as
stroke,
traumatic brain injury,
cerebral palsy,
autism,
and
Alzheimer's disease.[41]
The recent field of
Assistive Technology for Cognition concerns the development of
technologies to augment human cognition. Scheduling devices such as
Neuropage remind users with memory impairments when to perform
certain activities, such as visiting the doctor. Micro-prompting devices
such as PEAT,
AbleLink and
Guide have been used to aid users with memory and executive function
problems perform
activities of daily living.
Prosthetic
enhancement
Sgt. Jerrod Fields, a U.S. Army World Class Athlete Program
Paralympic sprinter hopeful, works out at the U.S. Olympic
Training Center in Chula Vista, Calif. A below-the-knee
amputee, Fields won a gold medal in the 100 meters with a
time of 12.15 seconds at the Endeavor Games in Edmond,
Okla., on June 13, 2009
In addition to the standard artificial limb for everyday use, many
amputees or
congenital patients have special limbs and devices to aid in the
participation of sports and recreational activities.
Within science fiction, and, more recently, within the
scientific community, there has been consideration given to using
advanced prostheses to replace healthy body parts with artificial
mechanisms and systems to improve function. The morality and
desirability of such technologies are being debated. Body parts such as
legs, arms, hands, feet, and others can be replaced.
The first experiment with a healthy individual appears to have been
that by the British scientist
Kevin Warwick. In 2002, an implant was interfaced directly into
Warwick's nervous system. The
electrode array, which contained around a hundred
electrodes, was placed in the
median nerve. The signals produced were detailed enough that a
robot arm was able to mimic the actions of Warwick's own arm and
provide a form of touch feedback again via the implant.[42]
The DEKA
company of
Dean Kamen developed the "Luke arm", an advanced prosthesis under
clinical trials in 2008.[43]
- Oscar Pistorius
In early 2008,
Oscar Pistorius, the "Blade Runner" of South Africa, was briefly
ruled ineligible to compete in the
2008 Summer Olympics because his transtibial prosthesis limbs were
said to give him an unfair advantage over runners who had ankles. One
researcher found that his limbs used twenty-five percent less energy
than those of an able-bodied runner moving at the same speed. This
ruling was overturned on appeal, with the appellate court stating that
the overall set of advantages and disadvantages of Pistorius' limbs had
not been considered. Pistorius did not qualify for the South African
team for the Olympics, but went on to sweep the
2008 Summer Paralympics, and has been ruled eligible to qualify for
any future Olympics. He qualified for the 2011 World Championship in
South Korea and reached the semifinal where he ended last timewise, he
was 14th in the first round, his personal best at 400m would have given
him 5th place in the finals.
At the
2012 Summer Olympics in London, Pistorius became the first amputee
runner to compete at an Olympic Games.[44]
He ran in the
400 metres race semifinals;,[45][46][47]
and the
4 × 400 metres relay race finals.[48]
He also competed in 5 events in the
2012 Summer Paralympics in London.[49]
Design
considerations
There are multiple factors to consider when designing a transtibial
prosthesis. Manufacturers must make choices about their priorities
regarding these factors.
Performance
Nonetheless, there are certain elements of socket and foot mechanics
that are invaluable for the athlete, and these are the focus of today’s
high-tech prosthetics companies:
- Fit - athletic/active amputees, or those with bony residua, may
require a carefully detailed socket fit; less-active patients may be
comfortable with a 'total contact' fit and gel liner
- Energy storage and return – storage of energy acquired through
ground contact and utilization of that stored energy for propulsion
- Energy absorption – minimizing the effect of high impact on the
musculoskeletal system
- Ground compliance – stability independent of terrain type and
angle
- Rotation – ease of changing direction
- Weight – maximizing comfort, balance and speed
- Suspension - how the socket will join and fit to the limb≈
Other
The buyer is also concerned with numerous other factors:
- Cosmetics
- Cost
- Ease of use
- Size availability
Cost
Transradial and transtibial prostheses typically cost between US
$6,000 and $8,000. Transfemoral and transhumeral prosthetics cost
approximately twice as much with a range of $10,000 to $15,000 and can
sometimes reach costs of $35,000. The cost of an artificial limb does
recur because artificial limbs are usually replaced every 3–4 years due
to
wear and tear. In addition, if the socket has fit issues, the socket
must be replaced within several months. If height is an issue components
can be changed, such as the pylons.[50]
[51]
Low cost above knee prostheses often provide only basic structural
support with limited function. This function is often achieved with
crude, non-articulating, unstable, or manually locking knee joints. A
limited number of organizations, such as the International Committee of
the Red Cross (ICRC), create devices for developing countries. Their
device which is manufactured by CR Equipments is a single-axis, manually
operated locking polymer prosthetic knee joint.[52]
Table. List of knee joint technologies based on the literature
review.
[53]
| Name of technology (country of origin) |
Brief description |
Highest level of
evidence |
| ICRC knee (Switzerland) |
Single-axis with manual lock |
Independent field |
| ATLAS knee (UK) |
Weigh-activated friction |
Independent field |
| POF/OTRC knee (US) |
Single-axis with ext. assist |
Field |
| DAV/Seattle knee (US) |
Compliant polycentric |
Field |
| LEGS M1 knee (US) |
Four-bar |
Field |
| JaipurKnee (India) |
Four-bar |
Field |
| LCKnee (Canada) |
Single-axis with automatic lock |
Field |
| None provided (Nepal) |
Single-axis |
Field |
| None provided (New Zealand) |
Roto-molded single-axis |
Field |
| None provided (India) |
Six-bar with squatting |
Technical development |
| Friction knee (US) |
Weigh-activated friction |
Technical development |
| Wedgelock knee (Australia) |
Weigh-activated friction |
Technical development |
| SATHI friction knee (India) |
Weigh-activated friction |
Limited data available |
Low Cost Above Knee Prosthetic Limbs: ICRC Knee (left) and
LC Knee (right)
There is currently an open Prosthetics design forum known as the
"Open Prosthetics Project". The group employs collaborators and
volunteers to advance Prosthetics technology while attempting to lower
the costs of these necessary devices.[54]
A plan for a low-cost artificial leg, designed by Sébastien Dubois,
was featured at the 2007 International Design Exhibition and award show
in Copenhagen, Denmark, where it won the
Index: Award. It would be able to create an energy-return prosthetic
leg for US
$8.00, composed primarily of
fiberglass.[55]
Prior to the 1980s, foot prostheses merely restored basic walking
capabilities. These early devices can be characterized by a simple
artificial attachment connecting one's residual limb to the ground.
The introduction of the
Seattle Foot (Seattle
Limb Systems) in 1981 revolutionized the field, bringing the concept
of an
Energy Storing Prosthetic Foot (ESPF) to the fore. Other companies
soon followed suit, and before long, there were multiple models of
energy storing prostheses on the market. Each model utilized some
variation of a compressible heel. The heel is compressed during initial
ground contact, storing energy which is then returned during the latter
phase of ground contact to help propel the body forward.
Since then, the foot prosthetics industry has been dominated by
steady, small improvements in performance, comfort, and marketability.
Jaipur Foot, an artificial limb from
Jaipur,
India,
costs about US$ 40.
References
-
^
πρόσθεσις. Liddell,
Henry George; Scott, Robert;
A Greek–English Lexicon at
Perseus Project
- ^
a
b
c
"Getting an Artificial Leg Up",
Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2000. Retrieved 11
February 2007.
-
^
Physics: A First Course.
"Connections, designing a better prosthetic leg"
-
^
"A Brief Review of the History of Amputations and Prostheses
Earl E. Vanderwerker, Jr., M.D. JACPOC 1976 Vol 15, Num 5".
-
^
"No. 1705: A 3000-Year-Old Toe". Uh.edu. 2004-08-01.
Retrieved 2013-03-13.
-
^
"Bronze single crown-like prosthetic restorations of teeth from
the Late Roman period = Des restaurations par prothèses
identiques à des couronnes en simple bronze de dents pendant la
fin de la période romaine". Cat.inist.fr.
Retrieved 2009-11-03.
-
^
Herodotus, The Histories.
9.37
-
^
"The Iron Hand of the Goetz von Berlichingen".
Karlofgermany.com. Retrieved
2009-11-03.
-
^
"Bryce, Geore, ''A Short History of the Canadian People''".
Archive.org. Retrieved
2009-11-03.
-
^
Romm, Sharon, "Arms by Design: From
Antiquity to the Renaissance," Plastic and Reconstructive
Surgery. July, 1988.
-
^
"A Brief History of Prosthetics". inMotion: A Brief
History of Prosthetics. November/December 2007.
Retrieved 23 November 2010.
-
^
Long, Ivan A. (1985).
"Normal Shape-Normal Alignment (NSNA) Above-Knee Prosthesis".
Clin Prosthet Orthot 9 (4): 9–14.
-
^
Gottschalk, Frank A.; Kourosh,
Sohrab; Stills, Melvin; McClellan, Bruce; Roberts, Jim (1989).
"Does Socket Configuration Influence the Position of the Femur
in Above-Knee Amputation?". Journal of Prosthetics &
Orthotics 2 (1): 94–102.
-
^
“History of Prosthetics”, Blatchford & Sons, Ltd. Retrieved
16 March 2008.
- ^
a
b
Pike, Alvin (May/June 1999). “The
New High Tech Prostheses”. InMotion Magazine 9 (3)
- ^
a
b
c
"How artificial limb is made - Background, Raw materials, The
manufacturing process of artificial limb, Physical therapy,
Quality control". Madehow.com. 1988-04-04.
Retrieved 2010-10-03.
-
^
Smit
G, Plettenburg DH (2010).
"Efficiency of Voluntary Closing Hand and Hook Prostheses".
Prosthetics and Orthotics International 34 (4):
411–427.
doi:10.3109/03093646.2010.486390.
PMID 20849359.
Retrieved 2011-03-11.
-
^
a
b
c
Martin, Craig W. (November 2003)
“Otto Bock C-leg: A review of its effectiveness”. WCB Evidence
Based Group
-
^
"Retrieved 14 April 2009". Freedom-innovations.com.
Retrieved 2010-10-03.
-
^
“The SLK, The Self-Learning Knee”, DAW Industries. Retrieved
16 March 2008.
-
^
Marriott, Michel (2005-06-20).
"Titanium and Sensors Replace Ahab's Peg Leg". The New
York Times. Retrieved
2008-10-30.
-
^
a
b
c
“Otto Bock Microprocessor Knees”,
Otto Bock. Retrieved 16 March 2008.
-
^
“FAQ: Questions and Answers on the C-Leg.”,
Otto Bock. Retrieved 1 April 2008.
-
^
“High-Tech for more Quality of Life”,
Otto Bock. Retrieved 16 March 2008.
-
^
a
b
“Clinical and Technical Information”[dead
link],
Otto Bock. Retrieved 16 March 2008.
-
^
Sherman, E. David (1964).
"A Russian Bioelectric-Controlled Prosthesis: Report of a
Research Team from the Rehabilitation Institute of Montreal".
Canadian Medical Association Journal 91 (24):
1268–1270.
PMC 1927453.
PMID 14226106.
-
^
Muzumdar, Ashok (2004). Powered Upper Limb Prostheses:
Control, Implementation and Clinical Application. Springer.
ISBN 978-3-540-40406-4.
- ^
a
b
Kuiken TA, Miller LA, Lipschutz RD, Lock BA, Stubblefield K,
Marasco PD, Zhou P, Dumanian GA (February 3, 2007). "Targeted
reinnervation for enhanced prosthetic arm function in a woman
with a proximal amputation: a case study". Lancet 369
(9559): 371–80.
doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60193-7.
PMID 17276777.
-
^
"Blogs: TR Editors' blog: Patients Test an Advanced Prosthetic
Arm". Technology Review. 2009-02-10.
Retrieved 2010-10-03.
-
^
"Defense Sciences Office". Darpa.mil.
Retrieved 2010-10-03.
-
^
"Advanced Signal Processing Dramatically Improves Capability of
Artificial Limbs"[dead
link], SIGMO Technology, 2005. Retrieved 11
February 2007.
-
^
"Bionic hand wins top tech prize". BBC News. 9 June 2008.
Retrieved 25 April 2010.
-
^
"Touch Bionics". Touch Bionics.
Retrieved 2010-10-03.
-
^
Highfield, Roger (31 May 2008).
"Gripping stuff". The Daily Telegraph (London).
Retrieved 25 April 2010.
-
^
"Bionic hand makes top inventions list // Current".
Current.com. 2008-11-06.
Retrieved 2010-10-03.
-
^
"Proto 1 and Proto 2". Ric.org. 2007-05-01.
Retrieved 2010-10-03.
-
^
World Premiere of Muscle and Nerve Controlled Arm Prosthesis
-
^
Permanently attached robotic arm, operated on mind-control
-
^
Max Ortiz Catalan and his robotic arm
-
^
ReWalk robotic pants
-
^
Serruya MD, Kahana MJ (2008).
"Techniques and devices to restore cognition". Behav
Brain Res 192 (2): 149–65.
doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2008.04.007.
PMC 3051349.
PMID 18539345.
-
^ Warwick,K,
Gasson,M, Hutt,B, Goodhew,I, Kyberd,P, Andrews,B, Teddy,P and
Shad,A. “The Application of Implant Technology for Cybernetic
Systems”, Archives of Neurology, 60(10), pp1369-1373,
2003
-
^
"IEEE Spectrum: Dean Kamen's "Luke Arm" Prosthesis Readies for
Clinical Trials".
-
^
Robert
Klemko (10 August 2012),
"Oscar Pistorius makes history, leaves without medal",
USA Today, archived from
the original on 11 August 2012
-
^
Oscar Pistorius makes Olympic history in 400m at London 2012,
BBC Sport, 4 August 2012
-
^
Bill
Chappell (4 August 2012),
Oscar Pistorius makes Olympic history in 400 meters, and
moves on to semifinal,
NPR,
archived from
the original on 4 August 2012
-
^
Men's 400m – semifinals,
retrieved 4 August 2012
-
^
Oscar Pistorius, South African 4×400m relay team finish 8th
as Bahamas wins gold, Huffington Post, 10 August 2012,
archived from
the original on 11 August 2012
-
^
Hawking, Pistorius open London's Paralympics:
Wheelchair-bound physicist Stephen Hawking challenged athletes
to 'look to the stars' as he helped open a record-setting
Paralympics Games that will run for 11 days in near sold-out
venues,
Yahoo! Sports, 30 August 2012, archived from
the original on 30 August 2012
-
^
"Cost of Prosthetics Stirs Debate",
Boston Globe, 5 July 2005. Retrieved 11 February 2007.
-
^
[8]
-
^
"ICRC: Trans-Femoral Prosthesis – Manufacturing Guidelines"
(PDF). Retrieved 2010-10-03.
-
^
ANDRYSEK, J., "Lower-limb
prosthetic technologies in the developing world: A review of
literature from 1994–2010" Prosthetics and Orthotics
International, 2010; Early Online, 1–21.
-
^
Open Prosthetics Website
-
^
INDEX:2007 INDEX: AWARD[dead
link]
External links
- Murdoch, George; A. Bennett Wilson,
Jr. (1997). A Primer on Amputations and Artificial Limbs.
United States of America: Charles C Thomas Publisher, Ltd. pp. 3–31.
ISBN 0-398-06801-1.
-
‘Biomechanics of running: from faulty movement patterns come
injury.' Sports Injury Bulletin.
- Edelstein, J. E. Prosthetic feet. State of the Art. Physical
Therapy 68(12) Dec 1988: 1874-1881.
-
Gailey, Robert. The Biomechanics of Amputee Running. October 2002.
- Hafner, B. J., Sanders, J. E., Czerniecki, J. M., Ferguson, J.
Transtibial energy-storage-and-return prosthetic devices: A review
of energy concepts and a proposed nomenclature. Journal of
Rehabilitation Research and Development Vol. 39, No. 1 Jan/Feb 2002:
1-11.