The results of the motion analysis when the subject was asked to demonstrate activation of four sequences to track simultaneous control of reinnervated sites using the TMR myoelectric prosthesis are shown in Figure 2.
The range of elbow flexion with the myoelectric prosthesis was close to that of a nonamputee control subject, in comparison to the static locked elbow used with the body-powered prosthesis (Table 3).
From a qualitative perspective, although no formal questionnaire was used, the subject reported feeling increased naturalness of movement and less mental effort to operate the TMR myoelectric prosthesis compared to the body-powered prosthesis.
In the case study presented, one of the more striking findings is that, while the subject clearly had slower performance with the myoelectric prosthesis, the movement was better and less trunk compensatory adjustments were required to perform the test.
The findings in this case study may be related solely to the fact that the elbow was locked in the first trial and that using the myoelectric prosthesis with the elbow locked would have shown similar compensatory movements as with the locked elbow body-powered prosthesis trial.
The subject in this case reported feeling increased naturalness of movement and less mental effort to operate the TMR myoelectric prosthesis compared to the body powered prosthesis.
Ideally, this case study would have collected pre-TMR data using a conventional myoelectric prosthesis, but because of funding restrictions the myoelectric prosthesis was not supplied until after the TMR surgery.
Improved myoelectric prosthesis control accomplished using multiple nerve transfers.