Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 23, 2026
A Structured Rehabilitation Protocol for Improved Multifunctional Prosthetic Control: A Case Study
Published on: November 6, 2015
PARTICIPATORY DESIGN OF PEDIATRIC UPPER LIMB PROSTHESES: QUALITATIVE METHODS AND PROTOTYPING
Tara Sims1, Andy Cranny2, Cheryl Metcalf3
1School of Health Sciences,University of Brightont.sims@brighton.ac.uk.
Insights
Children
Area of Science:
- Biomedical Engineering
- Rehabilitation Science
- Pediatric Prosthetics
Background:
- Previous research indicates children's dissatisfaction with upper limb prostheses.
- Existing studies often rely on parent proxy reports and quantitative measures.
- There is a need for direct input from children in prosthetic device design.
Purpose of the Study:
- To understand the perspectives of children, adolescents, parents, and professionals on upper limb prosthetic devices.
- To inform and improve the design of pediatric upper limb prostheses.
- To explore novel methods for incorporating user feedback into device development.
Main Methods:
- Employed the BRIDGE methodology of participatory design.
- Utilized focus groups and interviews with 34 participants.
- Included children (8-15 years), parents, prosthetists, and occupational therapists.
Main Results:
- Identified key areas for prosthetic improvement based on user feedback.
- Developed and tested prototypes incorporating user-identified needs.
- Gained feedback on prototypes from children and stakeholders.
Conclusions:
- Children and adolescents can be active partners in developing assistive devices.
- Participatory design frameworks enhance the development of daily living equipment.
- Rapid prototyping, specifically 3D printing, is effective in this collaborative process.
Objectives:
The study aims to develop an understanding of the views of children and adolescents, parents, and professionals on upper limb prosthetic devices to develop and improve device design. Previous research has found that children are dissatisfied with prostheses but has relied heavily on parent proxy reports and quantitative measures (such as questionnaires) to explore their views.
Methods:
Thirty-four participants (eight children aged 8-15 years with upper limb difference, nine parents, eight prosthetists, and nine occupational therapists) contributed to the development of new devices through the BRIDGE methodology of participatory design, using focus groups and interviews.
Results:
The study identified areas for improving prostheses from the perspective of children and adolescents, developed prototypes based on these and gained feedback on the prototypes from the children and other stakeholders (parents and professionals) of paediatric upper limb prostheses. Future device development needs to focus on ease of use, versatility, appearance, and safety.
Conclusions:
This study has demonstrated that children and adolescents can and should be involved as equal partners in the development of daily living equipment and that rapid prototyping (three-dimensional printing or additive manufacturing), used within a participatory design framework, can be a useful tool for facilitating this.
