Skip to main content
Duke University Libraries
DukeSpace Scholarship by Duke Authors
  • Login
  • Ask
  • Menu
  • Login
  • Ask a Librarian
  • Search & Find
  • Using the Library
  • Research Support
  • Course Support
  • Libraries
  • About
View Item 
  •   DukeSpace
  • Archival Collections
  • MEC Symposium Conference Proceedings
  • View Item
  •   DukeSpace
  • Archival Collections
  • MEC Symposium Conference Proceedings
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Upper Limb Prosthetic Outcome Measures (ULPOM) Group

Thumbnail
View / Download
237.9 Kb
Date
2008
Authors
Kyberd, Peter
Hill, Wendy
Repository Usage Stats
613
views
424
downloads
Abstract
In recent years there has been a sea change in the field of hand prosthetics, an increasing number of clinicians and researchers have a desire to be able to objectively measure the functional effectiveness of a prosthesis, or the ability of a user with their device. The problem has been that there are many tools to measure the function of hands and arms, but few seem appropriate to prosthetics. Also the tools that do exist seem to have conflicting aims and methods, so it is hard to choose the appropriate test. If practitioners have no meaningful way to test if a device is better for one user (compared with another device), they have no easy way to demonstrate to funders or providers that one solution is more effective than any other. Similarly, they lack a common language to simply pass on their professional judgement to their colleagues. What does exist is an array of different tools for measuring different aspects of prosthetic design, function and use. There is little standardisation between centres in the same country, let alone across borders and seas. Worse, there is evidence that existing techniques are being invalidated (conceivably through ignorance, and definitely due to pressures of time to conduct a truly systematic study). To save time, or effort, fully validated tests are being shortened, or favoured sub tests are being selected from the greater whole, so that the results obtained are incomplete, invalid, or simply wrong.
Type
Other article
Subject
Upper Limb Prosthesis
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/2790
Citation
Proceedings of the MEC’08 conference, UNB; 2008.
Collections
  • MEC Symposium Conference Proceedings
More Info
Show full item record

Copyright 2002, 2005 and 2008, The University of New Brunswick.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. Creative Commons License

Rights for Collection: MEC Symposium Conference Proceedings


Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info

Make Your Work Available Here

How to Deposit

Browse

All of DukeSpaceCommunities & CollectionsAuthorsTitlesTypesBy Issue DateDepartmentsAffiliations of Duke Author(s)SubjectsBy Submit DateThis CollectionAuthorsTitlesTypesBy Issue DateDepartmentsAffiliations of Duke Author(s)SubjectsBy Submit Date

My Account

LoginRegister

Statistics

View Usage Statistics
Duke University Libraries

Contact Us

411 Chapel Drive
Durham, NC 27708
(919) 660-5870
Perkins Library Service Desk

Digital Repositories at Duke

  • Report a problem with the repositories
  • About digital repositories at Duke
  • Accessibility Policy
  • Deaccession and DMCA Takedown Policy

TwitterFacebookYouTubeFlickrInstagramBlogs

Sign Up for Our Newsletter
  • Re-use & Attribution / Privacy
  • Harmful Language Statement
  • Support the Libraries
Duke University