The hand is an integral component of the human body, with an incredible spectrum of functionality. In addition to possessing gross and fine motor capabilities essential for physical survival, the hand is fundamental to social conventions, enabling greeting, grooming, artistic expression and syntactical communication. The loss of one or both hands is, thus, a devastating experience, requiring significant psychological support and physical rehabilitation. The majority of hand amputations occur in working-age males, most commonly as a result of work-related trauma or as casualties sustained during combat. For millennia, humans have used state-of-the-art technology to design clever devices to facilitate the reintegration of hand amputees into society. The present article provides a historical overview of the progress in replacing a missing hand, from early iron hands intended primarily for use in battle, to today's standard body-powered and myoelectric prostheses, to revolutionary advancements in the restoration of sensorimotor control with targeted reinnervation and hand transplantation.
DillinghamTRPezzinLEMacKenzieEJ. Limb amputation and limb deficiency: Epidemiology and recent trends in the United States.South Med J2002; 95: 875–83.
2.
Pliny's Natural History. Book VII, Chapter XXVIII. Translated by Rackham H, Jones WHS, Eicholz DE, Heinemann W. <www.masseiana.org/pliny.htm#BOOKXXVIII> (Accessed July 2, 2012).
3.
PuttiV.. Historical prostheses. Scritti Medici. First published La chirurgia degli organi di movimento, 1925, Vol. IX, nos 4 to 5.
MeierRH. History of arm amputation, prosthetic restoration, and arm amputation rehabilitation. In: Functional Restoration of Adults and Children with Upper Limb Amputation.New York: Demos Medical Publishing; 2004; 1–8.
SauerbruchF.. Die willkürlich bewegbare künstliche Hand. Eine Anleitung für Chirurgen und Techniker.Berlin: J. Springer: 1916.
8.
Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin. The Virtual Laboratory – Essays and Resources on the Experimentalization of Life. Excerpt from the movie: Die willkürlich bewegbare künstliche Hand. <http://vlp.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/library/data/lit38416> (Accessed July 9, 2012).
9.
PetriRPAguilaE.. The military upper extremity amputee.Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am2002; 13: 17–43.
ChildressDS. Historical aspects of powered limb prostheses.Clin Prosthet Orthot1985:9:2–13.
12.
About CAPO.Canadian Association for Prosthetics and Orthotics. <www.pando.ca/about.php#2> (Accessed July 20, 2012).
13.
GaineWJSmartC.Bransby-ZacharyM.. Upper limb traumatic amputees.J Hand Surg (British and European Volume)1997:22:73–6.
14.
ØstlieK.LesjøIMFranklinRJ. Prosthesis use in adult acquired major upper-limb amputees: Patterns of wear, prosthetic skills and the actual use of prostheses in activities of daily life.Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol2012; 7: 479–93.
15.
ReiterR.. Eine neue Electrokunsthand.Grenzgebiete der Medizin.1948; 4: 133–5.
16.
ScottRN. Myoelectric control of prostheses: A brief history. Presentation at Proceedings of the 1992 MyoElectric Controls/Powered Prosthetics Symposium.Fredericton, August, 1992.
17.
ShermanED. A Russian Bioelectric-Controlled Prosthesis.Can Med Assoc J1964; 91: 1268–70.
18.
BehrendC.ReiznerW.MarchessaultJA. Update on advances in upper extremity prosthetics.J Hand Surg Am2011; 36: 1711–7.
19.
ScottRNParkerPA. Myoelectric prostheses: State of the art.J Med Eng Technol1988; 12: 143–51.
20.
ParkerP.EnglehartK.HudginsB.. Myoelectric signal processing for control of powered limb prostheses.J Electromyogr Kinesiol2006; 16: 541–8.
21.
SchultzAEKuikenTA. Neural interfaces for control of upper limb prostheses: The state of the art and future possibilities.PMR2011; 3: 55–67.
22.
WorkSafeBC Evidence-Based Practice Group, EdeerD.MartinCW. Upper limb prostheses – a review of the literature with a focus on myoelectric hands.Richmond, BC: WorksafeBC Evidence-Based Practice Group; February 2011. <http://worksafebc.com/health_care_providers/Assets/PDF/UpperLimbProstheses2011.pdf> (Accessed September 20, 2012).
23.
McFarlandLVHubbard WinklerSLHeinemannAW. Unilateral upper-limb loss: Satisfaction and prosthetic-device use in veterans and service members from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts.J Rehabil Res Dev2010; 47: 299–316.
LightCMChappellPHHudginsB.. Intelligent multifunction myoelectric control of hand prostheses.J Med Eng Technol2002; 26: 139–46.
26.
BrånemarkR.OhrnellLONilssonP.. Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration during healing: An experimental in vivo study in the rat.Biomaterials1997; 18: 969–78.
27.
JönssonS.Caine-WinterbergerK.BrånemarkR.. Osseointegration amputation prostheses on the upper limbs: Methods, prosthetics and rehabilitation.Prosthet Orthot Int2011; 35: 190–200.
28.
JacobsR.BrånemarkR.OlmarkerK.. Evaluation of the psychophysical detection threshold level for vibrotactile and pressure stimulation of prosthetic limbs using bone anchorage or soft tissue support.Prosthet Orthot Int2000; 24: 133–42.
29.
KuikenTADumanianGALipschutzRD. The use of targeted muscle reinnervation for improved myoelectric prosthesis control in a bilateral shoulder disarticulation amputee.Prosthet Orthot Int2004; 28: 245–53.
30.
KuikenTAMillerLALipschutzRD. Targeted reinnervation for enhanced prosthetic arm function in a woman with a proximal amputation: A case study.Lancet2007; 369: 371–80.
31.
MillerLALipschutzRDStubblefieldKA. Control of a six degree of freedom prosthetic arm after targeted muscle reinnervation surgery.Arch Phys Med Rehabil2008; 89: 2057–65.
32.
MarascoPDSchultzAEKuikenTA. Sensory capacity of reinnervated skin after redirection of amputated upper limb nerves to the chest.Brain2009; 132: 1441–8.
33.
HebertJSOlsonJLMorhartMJ. Novel targeted sensory reinnervation technique to restore functional hand sensation after transhumeral amputation.IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. (In press)
34.
AgnewSPKoJ.De La GarzaM.. Limb transplantation and targeted reinnervation: A practical comparison.J Reconstr Microsurg2012; 28: 63–8.
35.
GilbertR.. Transplant is successful with a cadaver forearm.Med Trib Med News1964; 5: 20.
36.
GilbertR.. Hand transplanted from cadaver is reamputated.Med Trib Med News1964; 5: 23.
37.
DubernardJMOwenE.HerzbergG.. Human hand allograft: Report on first 6 months.Lancet1999; 353: 1315–20.
International Federation of Societies for Surgery of the Hand, Moran SL. Hand Transplantation – IFSSH Report 2010. <www.ifssh.info/Handtransplantation.pdf> (Accessed September 2, 2012).
40.
KanitakisJ.JullienD.PetruzzoP.. Clinicopathologic features of graft rejection of the first human hand allograft.Transplantation2003; 76: 688.
41.
DubernardJMPetruzzoP.LanzettaM.. Functional results of the first human double-hand transplantation.Ann Surg2003; 238: 128–36.
42.
KaufmanCLBlairB.MurphyE.. A new option for amputees: Transplantation of the hand.J Rehabil Res Dev2009; 46: 395–404.
43.
PetruzzoP.LanzettaM.DubernardJM. The International Registry on Hand and Composite Tissue Transplantation.Transplantation2010; 90: 1590–4.
44.
JonesNF. Concerns about human hand transplantation in the 21st century.J Hand Surg Am2002; 27: 771–87.
45.
International Registry on Hand and Composite Tissue Transplantation.World Experience. <www.handregistry.com/page.asp?page=4> (Accessed November 14, 2012).
46.
ChungKCOdaT.Saddawi-KonefkaD.. An economic analysis of hand transplantation in the United States.Plast Reconstr Surg2010; 125: 589–98.
47.
AmerH.CarlsenBTDussoJL. Hand transplantation.Minnesota Medicine2011; 94: 40–43.
48.
Ziegler-GrahamK.MacKenzieEJEphraimPL. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050.Arch Phys Med Rehabil2008; 89: 422–9.
