Superior Prosthetic Member Based on Assistive Technologies

  • Sorin Curea
  • Oana GemanEmail author
  • Iuliana Chiuchisan
  • Valentina Balas
  • Guojun Wang
  • Muhammad Arif
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1122)


Assistive Technology (AT) is a concept that refers to devices and services that can offset the functional limitations of people with disabilities and can facilitate their independent lives. Assistive Technology refers to products and services for those needs that are specific to people with disabilities, elderly and those with chronic diseases. AT allows these people to more in daily life and supports their independent life. In this paper, we propose the theoretical and practical approach to the use of AT instruments for a patient with the arm prosthesis. From communication to mobility, without forgetting devices that help the patient in daily activities, AT is a field of opportunities based on assistive equipment as solutions for social inclusion, health monitoring, and the life quality of the patients. Some of the objectives of this paper are: miniaturization of a bionic prosthesis, characteristic of the specific needs of the patient; the inclusion of sensors assigned to the prosthesis, by which the motion control is made, according to the interpretations the analysis of the sensors and the adaptation of prosthesis through the use of the assistive technologies.


Disabilities Prosthetic hand Assistive Technologies 



This work was supported from the project GUSV – “Intelligent Techniques for Medical Applications using Sensor Networks”, Project No. 10BM/2018, financed by UEFISCDI, Romania under the PNIII framework.


  1. 1.
    Arif, M., et al.: Maximizing information of multimodality brain image fusion using curvelet transform with genetic algorithm. In: 2014 International Conference on Computer Assisted System in Health (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arif, M., Wang, G.: Segmentation of calcification and brain hemorrhage with midline detection. In: 2017 IEEE International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing with Applications and 2017 IEEE International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing and Communications (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Qaisar, J., et al.: A hybrid technique for de-noising multi-modality medical images by employing cuckoo’s search with curvelet transform. Mehran Univ. Res. J. Eng. Technol. 37(1), 29–48 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arif, M., Wang, G.: Fast curvelet transform through genetic algorithm for multimodal medical image fusion. Soft Comput. 1–22 (2019)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scott, R.N.: Feedback in myoelectric prostheses. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 256, 58–63 (1990)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Scott, R.N.: Myoelectric control systems research at the Bio-Engineering Institute, University of New Brunswick. Med. Prog. Technol. 16, 5–10 (1990)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kelly, M.F., Parker, P.A., Scott, R.N.: The application of neural networks to myoelectric signal analysis: a preliminary study. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 37, 221–230 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lake, C., Miguelez, J.: Comparative analysis of microprocessors in upper-extremity prosthetics. J. Prosthet. Orthot. 15, 48–65 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Michael, J.W., Gailey, R.S., Bowker, J.H.: New developments in recreational prostheses and adaptive devices for the amputee. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 256, 64–75 (1990)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Meeks, D., LeBlanc, M.: Preliminary assessment of three new designs of prosthetic prehensors for upper limb amputees. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 12, 41–45 (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kruit, J., Cool, J.C.: Body-powered hand prosthesis with low operating power for children. J. Med. Eng. Technol. 13, 129–133 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sensky, T.E.: A simple and versatile driving appliance for upper-limb amputees. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 4, 47–49 (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Geman, O., Hagan, M., Chiuchisan, I.: A novel device for peripheral neuropathy assessment and rehabilitation. In: 2016 International Conference and Exposition on Electrical and Power Engineering (EPE), pp. 309–312 (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barleanu, A., Hagan, M., Geman, O., Chiuchisan, I.: Wearable ballistocardiography system for heartbeat detection. In: 2016 International Conference and Exposition on Electrical and Power Engineering (EPE), pp. 294–298 (2016)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chiuchisan, I., Geman, O., Prelipceanu, M., Costin, H.-N.: Healthcare system for monitoring older adults in a “green” environment using organic photovoltaic devices. Environ. Eng. Manag. J. (EEMJ) 15, 2595–2604 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geman, O., Chiuchisan, I., Ungurean, I., Hagan, M., Arif, M.: Ubiquitous healthcare system based on the sensors network and Android Internet of Things gateway. In: 2018 IEEE SmartWorld, Ubiquitous Intelligence Computing, Advanced Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing Communications, Cloud & Big Data Computing, Internet of People and Smart City Innovation (SmartWorld/SCALCOM/UIC/ATC/CBDCom/IOP/SCI), pp. 1390–1395 (2018)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chiuchisan, I., Geman, O., Postolache, O.: Future trends in exergaming using MS Kinect for medical rehabilitation. In: 2018 International Conference and Exposition on Electrical and Power Engineering (EPE), pp. 0683–0687 (2018)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Geman, O., Chiuchisan, I., Hagan, M.: Body sensor networks and Internet of Things for management and screening of patients with diabetic neuropathy. In: 2018 International Conference and Exposition on Electrical and Power Engineering (EPE), pp. 0688–0692 (2018)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Geman, O., Postolache, O.A., Chiuchisan, I., Prelipceanu, M., Hemanth, D.J.: An intelligent assistive tool using exergaming and response surface methodology for patients with brain disorders. IEEE Access 7, 21502–21513 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chappell, P.H., Kyberd, P.J.: Prehensile control of a hand prosthesis by a microcontroller. J. Biomed. Eng. 13, 363–369 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bergman, K., Ornholmer, L., Zackrisson, K., Thyberg, M.: Functional benefit of an adaptive myoelectric prosthetic hand compared to a conventional myoelectric hand. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 16, 32–37 (1997)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Almstrom, C., Herberts, P., Körner, L.: Experience with Swedish multifunctional prosthetic hands controlled by pattern recognition of multiple myoelectric signals. Int. Orthop. 5, 15–21 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bender, L.F.: Upper-extremity prosthetics. In: Handbook of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 4th ed. WB Saunders, Philadelphia (1990)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Miguelez, J., Lake, C., Conyers, D., Zenie, J.: The transradial anatomically contoured (TRAC) interface: design principles and methodology. J. Prosthet. Orthot. 15, 148–157 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Andrews, J.T.: Principles of prosthetics. In: Atlas of Limb Prosthetics, 2nd edn, pp. 255–265. Mosby-Year Book, Inc., St Louis (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lipschutz, R.D., Kuiken, T.A., Miller, L.A., Dumanian, G.A., Stubblefield, K.A.: Shoulder disarticulation externally powered prosthetic fitting following targeted muscle innervation for improved myoelectric prosthesis control. J. Prosthet. Orthot. 18, 28–34 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sorin Curea
    • 1
  • Oana Geman
    • 1
    Email author
  • Iuliana Chiuchisan
    • 1
  • Valentina Balas
    • 2
  • Guojun Wang
    • 3
  • Muhammad Arif
    • 3
  1. 1.Stefan cel Mare UniversitySuceavaRomania
  2. 2.Aurel Vlaicu UniversityAradRomania
  3. 3.Guangzhou UniversityGuangzhouChina

Personalised recommendations