Search

Introduction: Research with multiarticulating prosthetic hands on patient-reported ease of activities of daily living (ADLs) and usefulness is still limited. This study aimed at comparing ease of ADL performance and usefulness of two common multiarticulating prosthetic hands. Methods: Twenty subjects with transradial amputation wearing the bebionic (n = 10) or i-Limb (n = 10) hands were assessed with a hybrid Orthotics and Prosthetics User Survey–Upper Extremity Functional Status (OPUS-UEFS)/Prosthetic Upper Extremity Functional Index (PUFI) outcome measure previously used in a study with another multigrip prosthetic hand. Results: There were no significant differences between the bebionic and i-Limb hands. However, the analysis of individual activities revealed that each multiarticulating hand had specific strengths and weaknesses compared with a historic control group with conventional myoelectric hands. Discussion: Both multiarticulating hands may improve ease of performing ADLs compared with conventional myoelectric hands. However, more grip types available do not necessarily result in greater ease or usefulness compared with advanced hands with fewer grip types. Conclusions: Clinicians must match the patients' functional needs with the differential functional profiles of the available multiarticulating hands. Clinical Relevance: The present study is the first to provide comparative patient-reported outcomes on 3 multigrip prosthetic hands as well as standard myoelectric hands in 23 common ADLs. The distinct patient-reported ease and usefulness profiles of the different hands may inform and support clinicians' decision-making on hand selection for individual patients with transradial amputation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]