Surface electromyogram-controlled powered hand/wrist prostheses return partial upper-limb function to limb-absent persons. Typically, one degree of freedom (DoF) is controlled at a time, with mode switching between DoFs. Recent research has explored using large-channel EMG systems to provide simultaneous, independent and proportional (SIP) control of two joints—but such systems are not practical in current commercial prostheses. Thus, we investigated site selection of a minimum number of conventional EMG electrodes in an EMG-force task, targeting four sites for a two DoF controller. In a laboratory experiment with 10 able-bodied subjects and three limb-absent subjects, 16 electrodes were placed about the proximal forearm. Subjects produced 1-DoF and 2-DoF slowly force-varying contractions up to 30% maximum voluntary contraction (MVC). EMG standard deviation was related to forces via regularized regression. Backward stepwise selection was used to retain those progressively fewer electrodes that exhibited minimum error. For 1-DoF models using two retained electrodes (which mimics the current state of the art), subjects had average RMS errors of (depending on the DoF): 7.1–9.5 %MVC for able-bodied and 13.7–17.1 %MVC for limb-absent subjects. For 2-DoF models, subjects using four electrodes had errors on 1-DoF trials of 6.7–8.5 %MVC for able-bodied and 11.9–14.0 %MVC for limb-absent; and errors on 2-DoF trials of 9.9–11.2 %MVC for able-bodied and 15.8–16.7 %MVC for limb-absent subjects. For each model, retaining more electrodes did not statistically improve performance. The able-bodied results suggest that backward selection is a viable method for minimum error selection of as few as four electrode sites for these EMG-force tasks. Performance evaluation in a prosthesis control task is a necessary and logical next step for this site selection method.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Recent research has advanced two degree-of-freedom (DoF), simultaneous, independent and proportional control of hand-wrist prostheses using surface electromyogram signals from remnant muscles as the control input. We evaluated two such regression-based controllers, along with conventional, sequential two-site control with co-contraction mode switching (SeqCon), in box-block, refined-clothespin and door-knob tasks, on 10 able-bodied and 4 limb-absent subjects. Subjects operated a commercial hand and wrist using a socket bypass harness. One 2-DoF controller (DirCon) related the intuitive hand actions of open-close and pronation-supination to the associated prosthesis hand-wrist actions, respectively. The other (MapCon) mapped myoelectrically more distinct, but less intuitive, actions of wrist flexion-extension and ulnar-radial deviation. Each 2-DoF controller was calibrated from separate 90 s calibration contractions. SeqCon performed better statistically than MapCon in the predominantly 1-DoF box-block task (> 20 blocks/minute vs. 8–18 blocks/minute, on average). In this task, SeqCon likely benefited from an ability to easily focus on 1-DoF and not inadvertently trigger co-contraction for mode switching. The remaining two tasks require 2-DoFs, and both 2-DoF controllers each performed better (factor of 2–4) than SeqCon. We also compared the use of 12 vs. 6 optimally-selected EMG electrodes as inputs, finding no statistical difference. Overall, we provide further evidence of the benefits of regression-based EMG prosthesis control of 2-DoFs in the hand-wrist.