Alicia J. Davis

Toward improved sensorimotor integration and learning using upper-limb prosthetic devices

To harness the increased dexterity and sensing capabilities in advanced prosthetic device designs, amputees will require interfaces supported by novel forms of sensory feedback and novel control paradigms. We are using a motorized elbow brace to feed back grasp forces to the user in the form of extension torques about the elbow. This force display complements myoelectric control of grip closure in which EMG signals are drawn from the biceps muscle. We expect that the action/reaction coupling experienced by the biceps muscle will produce an intuitive paradigm for object manipulation, and we hope to uncover neural correlates to support this hypothesis. In this paper we present results from an experiment in which 7 able-bodied persons attempted to distinguish three objects by stiffness while grasping them under myoelectric control and feeling reaction forces displayed to their elbow. In four conditions (with and without force display, and using biceps myoelectric signals ipsilateral and contralateral to the force display,) ability to correctly identify objects was significantly increased with sensory feedback.

Understanding the role of haptic feedback in a teleoperated/prosthetic grasp and lift task

Achieving dexterous volitional control of an upper-limb prosthetic device will require multimodal sensory feedback that goes beyond vision. Haptic display is well-positioned to provide this additional sensory information. Haptic display, however, includes a diverse set of modalities that encode information differently. We have begun to make a comparison between two of these modalities, force feedback spanning the elbow, and amplitude-modulated vibrotactile feedback, based on performance in a functional grasp and lift task. In randomly ordered trials, we assessed the performance of N=11 participants (8 able-bodied, 3 amputee) attempting to grasp and lift an object using an EMG controlled gripper under three feedback conditions (no feedback, vibrotactile feedback, and force feed-back), and two object weights that were undetectable by vision. Preliminary results indicate differences between able-bodied and amputee participants in coordination of grasp and lift forces. In addition, both force feedback and vibrotactile feedback contribute to significantly better task performance (fewer slips) and better adaptation following an unpredicted weight change. This suggests that the development and utilization of internal models for predictive control is more intuitive in the presence of haptic feedback.

An exploration of grip force regulation with a low-impedance myoelectric prosthesis featuring referred haptic feedback

BackgroundHaptic display technologies are well suited to relay proprioceptive, force, and contact cues from a prosthetic terminal device back to the residual limb and thereby reduce reliance on visual feedback. The ease with which an amputee interprets these haptic cues, however, likely depends on whether their dynamic signal behavior corresponds to expected behaviors—behaviors consonant with a natural limb coupled to the environment. A highly geared motor in a terminal device along with the associated high back-drive impedance influences dynamic interactions with the environment, creating effects not encountered with a natural limb. Here we explore grasp and lift performance with a backdrivable (low backdrive impedance) terminal device placed under proportional myoelectric position control that features referred haptic feedback.MethodsWe fabricated a back-drivable terminal device that could be used by amputees and non-amputees alike and drove aperture (or grip force, when a stiff object was in its grasp) in proportion to a myoelectric signal drawn from a single muscle site in the forearm. In randomly ordered trials, we assessed the performance of N=10 participants (7 non-amputee, 3 amputee) attempting to grasp and lift an object using the terminal device under three feedback conditions (no feedback, vibrotactile feedback, and joint torque feedback), and two object weights that were indiscernible by vision.ResultsBoth non-amputee and amputee participants scaled their grip force according to the object weight. Our results showed only minor differences in grip force, grip/load force coordination, and slip as a function of sensory feedback condition, though the grip force at the point of lift-off for the heavier object was significantly greater for amputee participants in the presence of joint torque feedback. An examination of grip/load force phase plots revealed that our amputee participants used larger safety margins and demonstrated less coordination than our non-amputee participants.ConclusionsOur results suggest that a backdrivable terminal device may hold advantages over non-backdrivable devices by allowing grip/load force coordination consistent with behaviors observed in the natural limb. Likewise, the inconclusive effect of referred haptic feedback on grasp and lift performance suggests the need for additional testing that includes adequate training for participants.

An Empirical Evaluation of Force Feedback in Body-Powered Prostheses

Myoelectric prostheses have many advantages over body-powered prostheses, yet the absence of sensory feedback in myoelectric devices is one reason body-powered devices are often preferred by amputees. While considerable progress has been made in the mechanical design and control of myoelectric prostheses, research on haptic feedback has not had a similar impact. In this study, we seek to develop a fundamental understanding of the utility of force feedback and vision in the functional operation of a body-powered upper-limb prosthesis. Using a custom body-powered prosthesis in which force feedback can be conditionally removed, we asked

The role of auxiliary and referred haptic feedback in myoelectric control

{\rm N}=10

Factors associated with interest in novel interfaces for upper limb prosthesis control

non-amputee participants to identify objects based on stiffness in four separate conditions with and without visual and/or force feedback. Results indicate that the combination of visual and force feedback allows for the best accuracy, followed by force feedback only, then visual feedback only. In addition, combining force feedback with visual feedback does not significantly affect identification timing compared to visual feedback alone. These findings suggest that consideration should be given to the development of force feedback displays for myoelectric prostheses that function like a Bowden cable, coupling the amputee’s control input to the resulting feedback.

Comprehensive care for the child with upper extremity limb deficiency.

The use of haptic display to refer cues sensed electronically from a prosthetic terminal device promises to improve the function of myoelectrically controlled upper limb prostheses. This promise is often evaluated in experiments involving non-amputees, though the availability of additional haptic feedback from an intact hand (auxiliary feedback) may confound attempts to use non-amputees as stand-ins for amputees. In this paper we test the influence of auxiliary haptic feedback on myoelectric control performance by introducing various grasp conditions in a compensatory tracking task. We ask non-amputees to compensate for the motion of a random signal by producing myoelectric control signals with a hard object, soft object, or no object (requiring co-contraction) in their grasp. The error signal is displayed through a squeeze band worn about the upper arm or a visual display. Our results suggest that the main difference between tracking with haptic and visual feedback is low-frequency drift, and that auxiliary feedback does not substantially influence task performance. Despite the drift, our results show that participants are able to respond to cues presented through the squeeze band in the compensatory tracking task.

Are Investors' Gains and Losses from Securities Fraud Equal Over Time? Theory and Evidence

Background Surgically invasive interfaces for upper limb prosthesis control may allow users to operate advanced, multi-articulated devices. Given the potential medical risks of these invasive interfaces, it is important to understand what factors influence an individual’s decision to try one. Methods We conducted an anonymous online survey of individuals with upper limb loss. A total of 232 participants provided personal information (such as age, amputation level, etc.) and rated how likely they would be to try noninvasive (myoelectric) and invasive (targeted muscle reinnervation, peripheral nerve interfaces, cortical interfaces) interfaces for prosthesis control. Bivariate relationships between interest in each interface and 16 personal descriptors were examined. Significant variables from the bivariate analyses were then entered into multiple logistic regression models to predict interest in each interface. Results While many of the bivariate relationships were significant, only a few variables remained significant in the regression models. The regression models showed that participants were more likely to be interested in all interfaces if they had unilateral limb loss (p ≤ 0.001, odds ratio ≥ 2.799). Participants were more likely to be interested in the three invasive interfaces if they were younger (p < 0.001, odds ratio ≤ 0.959) and had acquired limb loss (p ≤ 0.012, odds ratio ≥ 3.287). Participants who used a myoelectric device were more likely to be interested in myoelectric control than those who did not (p = 0.003, odds ratio = 24.958). Conclusions Novel prosthesis control interfaces may be accepted most readily by individuals who are young, have unilateral limb loss, and/or have acquired limb loss However, this analysis did not include all possible factors that may have influenced participant’s opinions on the interfaces, so additional exploration is warranted.

Surveying the interest of individuals with upper limb loss in novel prosthetic control techniques

Children with limb deficiencies/amputations are best managed by a multidisciplinary team comprised of physicians specializing in their care, prosthetists, and therapists. For a successful functional outcome, the rehabilitation team will need to consider the goals of the child and parents as they select appropriate components that will aid and not overwhelm the child. The prosthesis will need to accommodate growth and development and withstand the rigors of use during play. The child will benefit from a team approach to introduce, train, and problem-solve the process of prosthetic restoration. We examine strategies for decision making for children with upper extremity limb deletions that will allow appropriate component selection to ensure the prosthesis will be accepted and improve function for the child.

A Requiem for the Retail Investor

Most leading securities regulation scholars argue that compensating securities fraud victims is inefficient. They maintain that because diversified investors that trade frequently are as likely to gain from trading in fraud-tainted stocks as they are to suffer harm from doing so, these investors should have no expected net losses from fraud over the long term. This assertion, which analogizes trading in fraud-tainted stocks to participating in a coin toss game in which players win