ArticleIEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics2025
Assessing the utility of Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interfaces (RPNIs) in providing referred sensations in a functional task in a virtual environment.
Article in IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Neural Interfaces for Bidirectional Sensory Restoration in Limb Prostheses: Current Evidence and Clinical Translation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Individuals who use upper limb prostheses receive limited feedback from their devices. Researchers have attempted to elicit sensation through direct stimulation of peripheral nerves or through stimulation of reinnervated skin or muscle. Previous research found that electrical stimulation of Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interfaces (RPNIs) elicited sensations that were referred to the phantom hand. The purpose of this study was to determine if this sensation could be used to improve performance of a functional task. Two participants with upper limb loss completed the Box and Blocks Test in a virtual environment under four feedback conditions on a single day of testing. These conditions included no feedback, vibration triggered by object contact, and two conditions where RPNIs were electrically stimulated upon object contact. For the RPNI conditions, one was non-somatotopic, meaning the RPNI sensation was referred to an area on the phantom hand and the other was somatotopic, where the referred sensation and virtual sensor were collocated. Participants moved more blocks with somatotopic feedback to a moderate effect. Both participants expressed a preference for the somatotopic sensation, noting that it made their movements feel more natural. Overall, this study demonstrates that RPNI-elicited sensation has the potential to improve performance in functional assessments.
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.