TY - JOUR
T1 - A comparative study of virtual hand prosthesis control using an inductive tongue control system
AU - Johansen, Daniel
AU - Sebelius, Fredrik
AU - Jensen, Stig
AU - Bentsen, Bo
AU - Popović, Dejan B.
AU - Andreasen Struijk, Lotte N S
PY - 2016/1/2
Y1 - 2016/1/2
N2 - This study compares the time required to activate a grasp or function of a hand prosthesis when using an electromyogram (EMG) based control scheme and when using a control scheme combining EMG and control signals from an inductive tongue control system (ITCS). Using a cross-over study design, 10 able-bodied subjects used a computer model of a hand and completed simulated grasping exercises. The time required to activate grasps was recorded and analyzed for both control schemes. End session mean activation times (ATs; seconds) for the EMG control scheme grasps 1 -5 were 0.80, 1.51, 1.95, 2.93, and 3.42; for the ITCS control scheme grasps 1 5 they were 1.19, 1.89, 1.75, 2.26, and 1.80. Mean AT for grasps 1 and 2 was statistically significant in favor of the EMG control scheme (p = 0.030; p = 0.004). For grasp 3 no statistical significance occurred, and for grasps 4 and 5 there was a statistical significance in favour of the ITCS control scheme (p = 0.048; p = 0.004). Based on the amount of training and the achieved level of performance, it is concluded that the proposed ITCS control scheme can be used as a means of enhancing prosthesis control.
AB - This study compares the time required to activate a grasp or function of a hand prosthesis when using an electromyogram (EMG) based control scheme and when using a control scheme combining EMG and control signals from an inductive tongue control system (ITCS). Using a cross-over study design, 10 able-bodied subjects used a computer model of a hand and completed simulated grasping exercises. The time required to activate grasps was recorded and analyzed for both control schemes. End session mean activation times (ATs; seconds) for the EMG control scheme grasps 1 -5 were 0.80, 1.51, 1.95, 2.93, and 3.42; for the ITCS control scheme grasps 1 5 they were 1.19, 1.89, 1.75, 2.26, and 1.80. Mean AT for grasps 1 and 2 was statistically significant in favor of the EMG control scheme (p = 0.030; p = 0.004). For grasp 3 no statistical significance occurred, and for grasps 4 and 5 there was a statistical significance in favour of the ITCS control scheme (p = 0.048; p = 0.004). Based on the amount of training and the achieved level of performance, it is concluded that the proposed ITCS control scheme can be used as a means of enhancing prosthesis control.
KW - Myoelectric control
KW - Prosthesis control schemes
KW - Upper limb prosthetics
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84962173323&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/10400435.2015.1070303
DO - 10.1080/10400435.2015.1070303
M3 - Article
C2 - 26479838
AN - SCOPUS:84962173323
SN - 1040-0435
VL - 28
SP - 22
EP - 29
JO - Assistive Technology
JF - Assistive Technology
IS - 1
ER -