The influence of environment: Experiences of users of myoelectric arm prosthesis-a qualitative study
- PMID: 28470129
- PMCID: PMC5808811
- DOI: 10.1177/0309364617704801
The influence of environment: Experiences of users of myoelectric arm prosthesis-a qualitative study
Abstract
Background: Prostheses are used to varying degrees; however, little is known about how environmental aspects influence this use.
Objectives: To describe users' experiences of how environmental factors influence their use of a myoelectric arm prosthesis.
Study design: Qualitative and descriptive.
Methods: A total of 13 patients previously provided with a myoelectric prosthetic hand participated. Their age, sex, deficiency level, etiology, current prosthesis use, and experience varied. Semi-structured interviews were audiotaped, transcribed, and analyzed through inductive content analysis.
Results: Four categories were created from the data: "Prosthesis function," "Other people's attitudes," "Support from family and healthcare," and "Individual's attitude and strategies." The overarching theme, "Various degrees of embodiment lead to different experiences of environmental barriers and facilitators," emerged from differences in individual responses depending on whether the individual was a daily or a non-daily prosthesis user. Environmental facilitators such as support from family and healthcare and good function and fit of the prosthesis seemed to help the embodiment of the prosthesis, leading to daily use. This embodiment seemed to reduce the influence of environmental barriers, for example, climate, attitudes, and technical shortcomings.
Conclusion: Embodiment of prostheses seems to reduce the impact of environmental barriers. Support and training may facilitate the embodiment of myoelectric prosthesis use. Clinical relevance For successful prosthetic rehabilitation, environmental factors such as support and information to the patient and their social network about the benefits of prosthesis use are important. Local access to training in myoelectric control gives more people the opportunity to adapt to prosthesis use and experience less environmental barriers.
Keywords: Upper limb prosthetics; amputation; congenital; environment; prosthetics; qualitative methods; rehabilitation; rehabilitation of prostheses users; upper extremity deformities.
Conflict of interest statement
Similar articles
-
The influence of environmental and personal factors on participation of lower-limb prosthetic users in low-income countries: prosthetists' perspectives.Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2015 May;10(3):245-51. doi: 10.3109/17483107.2014.905643. Epub 2014 Apr 2. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2015. PMID: 24694038
-
Do users want to receive a DEKA Arm and why? Overall findings from the Veterans Affairs Study to optimize the DEKA Arm.Prosthet Orthot Int. 2014 Dec;38(6):456-66. doi: 10.1177/0309364613506914. Epub 2013 Nov 28. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2014. PMID: 24286806
-
Functional comparison of upper extremity amputees using myoelectric and conventional prostheses.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1983 Jun;64(6):243-8. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1983. PMID: 6860093
-
Upper extremity myoelectric prosthetics.Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2000 Aug;11(3):639-52. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2000. PMID: 10989484 Review.
-
Perspectives on the comparative benefits of body-powered and myoelectric upper limb prostheses.J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2024 Aug 8;21(1):138. doi: 10.1186/s12984-024-01436-4. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2024. PMID: 39118106 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Prosthetic embodiment: systematic review on definitions, measures, and experimental paradigms.J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022 Mar 28;19(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s12984-022-01006-6. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022. PMID: 35346251 Free PMC article.
-
Users' and therapists' perceptions of myoelectric multi-function upper limb prostheses with conventional and pattern recognition control.PLoS One. 2019 Aug 29;14(8):e0220899. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220899. eCollection 2019. PLoS One. 2019. PMID: 31465469 Free PMC article.
-
Body-Self Unity With a New Hip or Knee: Understanding Total Joint Replacement Within an Embodiment Framework.ACR Open Rheumatol. 2019 Mar 30;1(2):90-96. doi: 10.1002/acr2.1014. eCollection 2019 Apr. ACR Open Rheumatol. 2019. PMID: 31777785 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Experience of adults with upper-limb difference and their views on sensory feedback for prostheses: a mixed methods study.J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022 Jul 23;19(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s12984-022-01054-y. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2022. PMID: 35870940 Free PMC article.
-
Psychometric evaluation of the Arabic version of the Quebec user evaluation of satisfaction with assistive technology (A-QUEST 2.0) in prosthesis users.Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2022 Feb;58(1):118-126. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.21.06880-5. Epub 2021 Jul 12. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2022. PMID: 34247472 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Sorbye R. Myoelectric prosthetic fitting in young children. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1980; 148: 34–40. - PubMed
-
- Esquenazi A. Amputation rehabilitation and prosthetic restoration. From surgery to community reintegration. Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26: 831–836. - PubMed
-
- Biddiss EA, Chau TT. Upper limb prosthesis use and abandonment: a survey of the last 25 years. Prosthet Orthot Int 2007; 31: 236–257. - PubMed
-
- Wessels R, Dijcks B, Soede M, et al. Non-use of provided assistive technology devices, a literature overview. Technol Disabil 2003; 15: 231–238.
-
- Ostlie K, Lesjo IM, Franklin RJ, et al. Prosthesis rejection in acquired major upper-limb amputees: a population-based survey. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2012; 7: 294–303. - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical