Event Title

Manual Gross Dexterity Analysis of Four Popular Styles of Enable 3D Printed Prosthetic Hands Using The Box and Block Test

Location

Taylor 405, Madison Union, JMU

Start Date

4-6-2019 9:00 AM

Description

eNABLE, a worldwide volunteer group, helps bring free prosthetics to people in need. However, the effectiveness of their prosthetic hands has never been tested. We tested the manual gross dexterity of the four most popular styles of eNABLE hands, the Unlimbited Phoenix, Phoenix V2, Raptor Reloaded, and Osprey hands using the Box and Block Test (BBT). We found that the Raptor Reloaded hand performed significantly worse when compared to the Phoenix V2 and Unlimbited Phoenix hands with p < 0.05. There was no statistically significant difference between the Raptor Reloaded and Osprey hands with p=0.096. The results show that eNABLE devices still need minor improvements in order to compare favorably with some of the lower performing commercially available prosthetic hands. This work, therefore, establishes a quantitative baseline of performance of current eNABLE designs and provides a clinically validated testing protocol for future assessment of 3D printed prosthetic devices.

Presentation Type

Poster

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Apr 6th, 9:00 AM

Manual Gross Dexterity Analysis of Four Popular Styles of Enable 3D Printed Prosthetic Hands Using The Box and Block Test

Taylor 405, Madison Union, JMU

eNABLE, a worldwide volunteer group, helps bring free prosthetics to people in need. However, the effectiveness of their prosthetic hands has never been tested. We tested the manual gross dexterity of the four most popular styles of eNABLE hands, the Unlimbited Phoenix, Phoenix V2, Raptor Reloaded, and Osprey hands using the Box and Block Test (BBT). We found that the Raptor Reloaded hand performed significantly worse when compared to the Phoenix V2 and Unlimbited Phoenix hands with p < 0.05. There was no statistically significant difference between the Raptor Reloaded and Osprey hands with p=0.096. The results show that eNABLE devices still need minor improvements in order to compare favorably with some of the lower performing commercially available prosthetic hands. This work, therefore, establishes a quantitative baseline of performance of current eNABLE designs and provides a clinically validated testing protocol for future assessment of 3D printed prosthetic devices.