ArticleCanadian prosthetics & orthotics journal2022
Does Trans-radial Longitudinal Compression Influence Myoelectric Control?
Article in Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExisting trans-radial prosthetic socket designs are not optimised to facilitate reliable myoelectric control. Many socket designs pre-date the introduction of myoelectric devices. However, socket designs featuring improved biomechanical stability, notably longitudinal compression sockets, have emerged in more recent years. Neither the subsequent effects, if any, of stabilising the limb on myoelectric control nor in which arrangement to apply the compression have been reported. METHODOLOGY: Twelve able-bodied participants completed two tasks whilst wearing a longitudinal compression socket simulator in three different configurations: 1) compressed, where the compression strut was placed on top of the muscle of interest, 2) relief, where the compression struts were placed either side of the muscle being recorded and 3) uncompressed, with no external compression. The tasks were 1) a single-channel myoelectric target tracking exercise, followed by 2), a high-intensity grasping task. The wearers' accuracy during the tracking task, the pressure at opposing sides of the simulator during contractions and the rate at which the limb fatigued were observed.
findingsNo significant difference between the tracking-task accuracy scores or rate of fatigue was observed for the different compression configurations. Pressure recordings from the compressed configuration showed that pressure was maintained at opposing sides of the simulator during muscle contractions.
conclusionLongitudinal compression does not inhibit single-channel EMG control, nor improve fatigue performance. Longitudinal compression sockets have the potential to improve the reliability of multi-channel EMG control due to the maintenance of pressure during muscle contractions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.