Scanning Technologies Adoption for Transtibial Residual Limb Shape Characterization
DOI:
http://doi.org/10.31272/jeasd.2818Keywords:
Accuracy, Peel 3 Scanner, Precision, Smartphone 3D Scanning, Transtibial AmputationAbstract
In prosthetics, 3D scanning technology plays a crucial role in gathering data for designing prosthetic devices. New tools for capturing the external shape of human body parts are rapidly emerging. This study conducted a comparative analysis to assess the accuracy and precision of two handheld 3D scanners, including the Peel 3 3D scanner and a smartphone application, in scanning the residual limb of a transtibial participant. The residual limb was manually measured, and six scans were taken with each scanning system, compared to the reference computed tomography (CT) model. A repetition test was performed to determine the mean value and standard deviation of the scanned models in VXelements software for comparison purposes. The results showed a standard deviation difference between the Peel 3 and CT scans ranging from ± 0.828 to 0.907mm, and from ± 0.823 to ± 0.877mm for the smartphone scans. The repetition test indicated standard deviations ranging from ± 0.531 to 0.599 mm for the Peel 3 and ± 0.458 to 0.690 mm for the smartphone. This analysis evaluated the accuracy of the 3D scanners and identified the essential specifications for their effective use in prosthetics.
References
G. M. Hobusch, K. Döring, R. Brånemark, and R. Windhager, “Advanced techniques in amputation surgery and prosthetic technology in the lower extremity,” EFORT Open Rev, vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 724–741, Oct. 2020, doi: http://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.5.190070.
L. G. De Vivo Nicoloso, J. Pelz, H. Barrack, and F. Kuester, “Towards 3D printing of a monocoque transtibial prosthesis using a bio-inspired design workflow,” Rapid Prototyp J, vol. 27, no. 11, pp. 67–80, Dec. 2021, doi: http://doi.org/10.1108/RPJ-06-2021-0136.
M. van der Stelt et al., “Pioneering low-cost 3D-printed transtibial prosthetics to serve a rural population in Sierra Leone – an observational cohort study,” EClinicalMedicine, vol. 35, p. 100874, May 2021, doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100874.
E. Seminati, M. Young, D. Canepa Talamas, M. Twiste, V. Dhokia, and J. Bilzon, “Reliability of three different methods for assessing amputee residuum shape and volume: 3D scanners vs. circumferential measurements,” Prosthet Orthot Int, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 327–334, Aug. 2022, doi: http://doi.org/10.1097/PXR.0000000000000105.
C. O. Squibb, M. L. Madigan, and M. K. Philen, “A high precision laser scanning system for measuring shape and volume of transtibial amputee residual limbs: Design and validation,” PLoS One, vol. 19, no. 7, p. e0301619, Jul. 2024, doi: http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301619.
W. Mehmood, N. Abd Razak, M. Lau, T. Chung, H. Gholizadeh, and N. Abu Osman, “Comparative study of the circumferential and volumetric analysis between conventional casting and three-dimensional scanning methods for transtibial socket: A preliminary study,” Proc Inst Mech Eng H, vol. 233, no. 2, pp. 181–192, Feb. 2019, doi: http://doi.org/10.1177/0954411918816124.
N. Afiqah Hamzah, N. A. A. Razak, M. Sayuti Ab Karim, and H. Gholizadeh, “A review of history of CAD/CAM system application in the production of transtibial prosthetic socket in developing countries (from 1980 to 2019),” Proc Inst Mech Eng H, vol. 235, no. 12, pp. 1359–1374, Dec. 2021, doi: http://doi.org/10.1177/09544119211035200.
E. Seminati, D. Canepa Talamas, M. Young, M. Twiste, V. Dhokia, and J. L. J. Bilzon, “Validity and reliability of a novel 3D scanner for assessment of the shape and volume of amputees’ residual limb models,” PLoS One, vol. 12, no. 9, p. e0184498, Sep. 2017, doi: http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0184498.
L. Armitage, L. K. Kwah, and L. Kark, “Reliability and validity of the iSense optical scanner for measuring volume of transtibial residual limb models,” Prosthet Orthot Int, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 213–220, Apr. 2019, doi: http://doi.org/10.1177/0309364618806038.
Y. R. Nagarajan, F. Farukh, V. V. Silberschmidt, K. Kandan, A. K. Singh, and P. Mukul, “Shape Analysis of Prosthetic Socket Rectification Procedure for Transtibial Amputees,” Prosthesis, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 157–174, Feb. 2024, doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/prosthesis6010013.
F. Górski, R. Wichniarek, W. Kuczko, and M. Żukowska, “Study on Properties of Automatically Designed 3D-Printed Customized Prosthetic Sockets,” Materials, vol. 14, no. 18, p. 5240, Sep. 2021, doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/ma14185240.
P. G. M. Knoops et al., “Comparison of three-dimensional scanner systems for craniomaxillofacial imaging,” Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, vol. 70, no. 4, pp. 441–449, Apr. 2017, doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2016.12.015.
P. Neri, A. Paoli, B. Aruanno, S. Barone, F. Tamburrino, and A. V. Razionale, “3D scanning of Upper Limb anatomy by a depth-camera-based system,” International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM), Feb. 2023, doi: http://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-023-01248-1.
R. Grande, J. Albusac, D. Vallejo, C. Glez-Morcillo, and J. J. Castro-Schez, “Performance Evaluation and Optimization of 3D Models from Low-Cost 3D Scanning Technologies for Virtual Reality and Metaverse E-Commerce,” Applied Sciences, vol. 14, no. 14, p. 6037, Jul. 2024, doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/app14146037.
M. Farhan, J. Z. Wang, J. Lillia, T. L. Cheng, and J. Burns, “Comparison of multiple 3D scanners to capture foot, ankle, and lower leg morphology,” Prosthet Orthot Int, vol. 47, no. 6, pp. 625–632, Dec. 2023, doi: http://doi.org/10.1097/PXR.0000000000000230.
I. A. Cabrera et al., “Smartphone Telemedicine: A Novel Workflow for Creating Prosthetic Sockets Using Semi-automated Photogrammetry”, doi: http://doi.org/10.36227/techrxiv.12704984.v1.
H. L. Rudy, N. Wake, J. Yee, E. S. Garfein, and O. M. Tepper, “Three-Dimensional Facial Scanning at the Fingertips of Patients and Surgeons: Accuracy and Precision Testing of iPhone X Three-Dimensional Scanner,” Plast Reconstr Surg, vol. 146, no. 6, pp. 1407–1417, Dec. 2020, doi: http://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000007387.
R. Ismail et al., “Affordable and Faster Transradial Prosthetic Socket Production Using Photogrammetry and 3D Printing,” Electronics (Basel), vol. 9, no. 9, p. 1456, Sep. 2020, doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/electronics9091456.
S. Cullen, R. Mackay, A. Mohagheghi, and X. Du, “The use of smartphone photogrammetry to digitise transtibial sockets: Optimisation of method and quantitative evaluation of suitability,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 24, Dec. 2021, doi: http://doi.org/10.3390/s21248405.
Y. Wakjira, N. S. Kurukkal, and H. G. Lemu, “Assessment of the accuracy of 3D printed medical models through reverse engineering,” Heliyon, vol. 10, no. 11, Jun. 2024, doi: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e31829.
Downloads
Key Dates
Received
Revised
Accepted
Published Online First
Issue
Section
License
