A Matrix Model for Creating Logical Filters of an Electronic Catalog of Prosthetic Modules for Customized Prostheses
https://doi.org/10.32603/1993-8985-2022-25-1-54-63
Abstract
Introduction. When synthesizing a prosthesis from ready-made prosthesis units, the prosthetist is faced with the problem of selecting from a large range of components that differ in properties and characteristics. This challenge can be overcome by the creation of a system for processing the patient's biomedical information and its further use as criteria for selecting prosthetic nodes from a global database. For this purpose, an appropriate knowledge base must be incorporated into the system software.
Aim. Substantiation of the expediency of presenting the knowledge base about the requirements for the lower limb prosthesis nodes in the form of a matrix model for creating a system of logical filters in the process of selecting nodes from an electronic catalog.
Materials and methods. Theoretical research methods were used, including analysis, synthesis and analogy. An expert survey among leading specialists was carried out. To unify the description of the structural and functional state of a disabled person, the terms of the International Classification of Functioning (ICF), Disability and Health were used.
Results. At the main stage of filtering, prosthetic modules optimally meeting the patient’s needs are selected using a specialized software application, depending on the patient’s health status and various healthrelated factors. A model of the knowledge base is presented, which describes the logic of selecting prosthetic nodes and their filtering in an electronic catalog.
Conclusion. The matrix representation of the knowledge base that contains rules for selecting components of lower limb prostheses, taking into account the patient's condition, is a basis for creating a system of logical filters when searching for prosthetic modules in an electronic catalog for creating customized prostheses. The use of the ICF conceptual language for describing the factors influencing the choice of prosthetic modules is a step towards the formation of a patient’s digital profile, which corresponds to the strategy of transition to digital medicine technologies.
About the Authors
L. M. SmirnovaRussian Federation
Ludmila M. Smirnova, Dr Sci. (Eng.) (2011), Associative Professor at the Department of Bioengineering sys-tems, Senior Research Scientist of the Division of biomechanical research of locomotor system
5F Professor Popov St., St Petersburg 197022
E. V. Fogt
Russian Federation
Elizaveta V. Fogt, Master in Bioengineering Systems and Technologies (2019), post-graduate student of De-partment of Bioengineering Systems, Juniour Research Scientist at the Division of biomechanical research of locomotor system
5F Professor Popov St., St Petersburg 197022
A. V. Sinegub
Russian Federation
Andrey V. Sinegub, postgraduate student in Mechatronics and robotics of Peter the Great, Juniour Research Scientist at the Division of biomechanical research of locomotor system
Bestuzhevskaya st., 50, St. Petersburg 195067
H. Solieman
Russian Federation
Hanadi Solieman, Bachelor in Electromechanics – Mechatronics (2018, Tishreen University, Syria), Master in Bioengineering Systems and Technologies (2019), post-graduate student, assistant of the Department of Bioengi-neering Systems, Assistant at the Mechatronics program for Distin-guished
5F Professor Popov St., St Petersburg 197022
References
1. MOBIS Classification System. Available at: https://www.ottobock.ru/prosthetics/info-for-new-amputees/mobis-system/ (accessed 18.10.2021) (In Russ.)
2. A Line of Prosthetic Appliances. Available at: https://www.energia.ru/ru/conversion/prosthetic/prosthetic.html (accessed 18.10.2021) (In Russ.)
3. Perry B. N., Moran C. W., Armiger R. S., Pasquina P. F., Vandersea J. W., Tsao J. W. Initial Clinical Evaluation of the Modular Prosthetic Limb. Front Neurol. 2018, vol. 9, p. 153. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00153
4. Balk E. M., Gazula A., Markozannes G., Kimmel H. J., Saldanha I. J., Resnik L. J., Trikalinos T. A. Lower Limb Pros-theses: Measurement Instruments, Comparison of Com-ponent Effects by Subgroups, and Long-Term Outcomes. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US). Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK531523/ (accessed 25.10.2021)
5. Theeven P. J., Hemmen B., Brink P. R., Smeets R. J., Seelen H. A. Measures and Procedures Utilized to Determine the Added Value of Microprocessor-Controlled Prosthetic Knee Joints: a Systematic Review. BMC Musculoskelet Dis-ord. 2013, vol. 14, art. no. 333. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-14-333
6. Balk E., Resnik L., Springs S., D'Andrea S., Magill M., Gazula A., Di M., Twomey-Wilson E. Comparisons of Low-er Limb Prosthesis Components and Long-Term Continued Use of Prostheses: A Systematic Review. Archives of Physi-cal Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2017, vol. 98, no. 10, p. e135. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.08.439
7. Saikko V., Shen M. Wear Comparison Between a Dual Mobility Total Hip Prosthesis and a Typical Modu-lar Design Using a Hip Joint Simulator. Wear. 2010, vol. 268, no. 3, p. 617–621. doi: 10.1016/j.wear.2009.10.011
8. Gailey R. S., Roach K. E., Applegate E. B., Cho B., Cunniffe B., Licht S., Maguire M., Nash M. S. The Ampu-tee Mobility Predictor: an Instrument to Assess Determi-nants of the Lower-Limb Amputee’s Ability to Ambulate. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2002, vol. 83, no. 5, pp. 613–627. doi: 10.1053/ampr.2002.32309
9. World Health Organization: International Classifica-tion of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. 2001, Gene-va: World Health Organization. Available at: https://www.who.int/standards/classifications/international-classification-of-functioning-disability-and-health (ac-cessed 25.10.2021)
10. Madden R. H., Bundy A. The ICF Has Made a Dif-ference to Functioning and Disability Measurement and Statistics. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2019, vol. 41, no. 12, pp. 1450–1462. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2018.1431812
11. Cifu D. X. Braddom’s Physical Medicine and Reha-bilitation, 6th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Health Sciences, 2020. Available at: https://www.elsevier.com/books/braddoms-physical-medicine-and-rehabilitation/cifu/978-0-323-62539-5 (accessed 25.10.2021)
12. Gailey R., Clemens S., Sorensen J., Kirk-Sanchez N., Gaunaurd I., Raya M., Klute G., Pasquina P. Variables that Influence Basic Prosthetic Mobility in People With Non-Vascular Lower Limb Amputation. PM&R. 2020, vol. 12, iss. 2, pp. 130–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.12223
13. Üstün T. B., Chatterji S., Bickenbach J., Kostanjsek N., Schneider M. The International Classification of Func-tioning, Disability and Health: a New Tool for Understand-ing Disability and Health. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2003, vol. 25, no. 11–12, pp. 565–571. doi: 10.1080/0963828031000137063
14. Kostanjsek N. Use of The International Classifi-cation of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) as a Conceptual Framework and Common Language for Disability Statistics and Health Information Systems. BMC Public Health. 2011, vol. 11, no. 4, p. S3. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-S4-S3
15. Steiner W. A., Ryser L., Huber E., Uebelhart D., Aeschlimann A., Stucki G. Use of the ICF Model as a Clini-cal Problem-Solving Tool in Physical Therapy and Reha-bilitation Medicine. Physical Therapy. 2002, vol. 82, no. 11, pp. 1098–1107. doi: 10.1093/ptj/82.11.1098
16. How to use the ICF: A Practical Manual for Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disabilty and Health (ICF). Available at: https://www.who.int/classifications/drafticfpracticalmanual2.pdf (accessed 25.10.2021)
Review
For citations:
Smirnova L.M., Fogt E.V., Sinegub A.V., Solieman H. A Matrix Model for Creating Logical Filters of an Electronic Catalog of Prosthetic Modules for Customized Prostheses. Journal of the Russian Universities. Radioelectronics. 2022;25(1):54-63. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.32603/1993-8985-2022-25-1-54-63