Skip to main content

Table 4 Average results for Amputee Subjects using SH2-P, and comparison with the SH-P (data from [28]), the Hosmer 5XA body-powered hook and the Motion Control Electric Device (data from [51]), the Switch-Controlled hand and the Ottobock 8E44 DMC Plus (data from [53]), the Michelangelo Hand controlled with Direct Control and Pattern Recognition Control (data from [52])

From: Exploring augmented grasping capabilities in a multi-synergistic soft bionic hand

Terminal Device Control Method BBT JTT
SH2-P Myoelectric Cont. PR (8 sEMG sensors) 10.67 ±2.3 290.75 ±33.7
SH-P [28] Myoelectric DC (2 sEMG sensors) 9.6 ±1.4 327.46 ±22.8
Hosmer 5XA Hook [51] Body-Powered Harness 49 NA
Motion Control Electric Device [51] Myoelectric DC (2 sEMG sensors) 20 NA
1 DoF Hand [53] Switch-Controlled (humeral abduction) 6 621
Ottobock 8E44 DMC Plus [53] Myoelectric DC (2 sEMG sensors) 2 / 8 769/567
Michelangelo Hand [52] Myoelectric DC (2 sEMG sensors) 14.7 ±9/8.7 ±5.5 362 ±135.1/331 ±52.1
  Myoelectric PR (6 sEMG sensors) 5.7 ±1.2/11 ±6.1 346.3 ±77.7/332.3 ±69.3
  1. Data before/after 8 weeks training with a single subject
  2. Data before/after home trial