Content uploaded by Dimitrios Katsavelis
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Dimitrios Katsavelis on Feb 05, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
Cyborg beast: a low-cost 3d-printed prosthetic
hand for children with upper-limb differences
Zuniga et al.
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-0971-9
R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E Open Access
Cyborg beast: a low-cost 3d-printed prosthetic
hand for children with upper-limb differences
Jorge Zuniga
1*
, Dimitrios Katsavelis
1
, Jean Peck
2
, John Stollberg
3
, Marc Petrykowski
1
, Adam Carson
1
and Cristina Fernandez
4
Abstract
Background: There is an increasing number of children with traumatic and congenital hand amputations or
reductions. Children's prosthetic needs are complex due to their small size, constant growth, and psychosocial
development. Families’financial resources play a crucial role in the prescription of prostheses for their children,
especially when private insurance and public funding are insufficient. Electric-powered (i.e., myoelectric) and
body-powered (i.e., mechanical) devices have been developed to accommodate children’s needs, but the cost of
maintenance and replacement represents an obstacle for many families. Due to the complexity and high cost of
these prosthetic hands, they are not accessible to children from low-income, uninsured families or to children from
developing countries. Advancements in computer-aided design (CAD) programs, additive manufacturing, and image
editing software offer the possibility of designing, printing, and fitting prosthetic hands devices at a distance and
at very low cost. The purpose of this preliminary investigation was to describe a low-cost three-dimensional
(3D)-printed prosthetic hand for children with upper-limb reductions and to propose a prosthesis fitting
methodology that can be performed at a distance.
Results: No significant mean differences were found between the anthropometric and range of motion measurements
taken directly from the upper limbs of subjects versus those extracted from photographs. The Bland and Altman
plots show no major bias and narrow limits of agreements for lengths and widths and small bias and wider limits of
agreements for the range of motion measurements. The main finding of the survey was that our prosthetic device
may have a significant potential to positively impact quality of life and daily usage, and can be incorporated in
several activities at home and in school.
Conclusions: This investigation describes a low-cost 3D-printed prosthetic hand for children and proposes a
distance fitting procedure. The Cyborg Beast prosthetic hand and the proposed distance-fitting procedures may
represent a possible low-cost alternative for children in developing countries and those who have limited access to
health care providers. Further studies should examine the functionality, validity, durability, benefits, and rejection rate
of this type of low-cost 3D-printed prosthetic device.
Keywords: 3D printing, Computer-aided design, Low-cost prosthesis, Custom-made prosthesis, Prosthesis
for children
* Correspondence: JorgeZuniga@creighton.edu
1
Department of Exercise Science and Pre Health Professions, Creighton
University, Omaha, NE 68178, USA
Full list of author information is available at the end of the article
© 2015 Zuniga et al.; licensee BioMed Central. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and
reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain
Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article,
unless otherwise stated.
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10
DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-0971-9
Background
Children’s prosthetic needs are complex due to their
small size, constant growth, and psychosocial develop-
ment [1]. Familial financial resources play a crucial role
in prescription of prostheses for children, especially when
private insurance and public funding are insufficient [1].
Most upper-limb prostheses include a terminal device,
with the objective to replace the missing hand or fingers.
The cost of a body-powered prosthetic hand ranges from
$4,000 to $20,000; depending on the mode of control,
these devices require extensive fitting procedures to de-
velop the terminal device and often include a complex
system of cables and harnesses [2]. Electric-powered
units (i.e., myoelectric) and mechanical devices (i.e., body-
powered) have been improved to accommodate children’s
needs, but the cost of maintenance and replacement rep-
resents an obstacle for many families. Voluntary-closing
upper-limb prosthetic devices are more suitable for chil-
dren [1,3] and play a crucial role in improving gross motor
development [1]. Currently, the most cost-effective option
for pediatric populations is a passive prosthetic hook [1];
although functional, these devices have a high rejection
rate, in part due to an unacceptable cosmetic appearance
[4-6]. Most current prosthetics do not adapt to the normal
growth of children’s limbs and require constant visits to
health care providers for adjustments or replacement,
which may lead to abandonment [1,6].
There has been an increase in the number of children
born with congenital upper-limb deficiencies or ac-
quired traumatic amputations during the past two de-
cades [7-9]. It is estimated that, in the United States,
more than 32,500 children suffer from a major pediatric
amputation [8], and the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention estimates that about 1,500 children are
born with upper-limb reductions in the United States
each year [9]. Worldwide estimates for upper-limb re-
ductions range from 4-5/10,000 to 1/100 live births [7].
There is a critical need for practical, easy-to-replace,
customized, aesthetically appealing, low-cost prosthetic
devices for children [10].
Advancements in computer-aided design (CAD) pro-
grams, additive manufacturing, and open source image
editing software offer the possibility of designing, print-
ing, and fitting prosthetic hands and other assistive de-
vices at very low cost [11] (Figure 1). The development
of low-cost prosthetic devices with practical and easy fit-
ting procedures that can be performed at a distance would
have a significant clinical and social impact on children
around the world.
Research Purpose
The aim of this preliminary investigation was to briefly
describe a low-cost three-dimensional (3D)-printed pros-
thetic hand for children with upper-limb reductions and
to propose a prosthesis fitting methodology that can be
performed at a distance. We hypothesized that anthropo-
metric measurement of the upper limbs taken from pho-
tographs and processed by image editing software would
not differ from anthropometric measurements taken dir-
ectly on upper limbs.
Methods
Subjects
Eleven children (two girls and seven boys, 3 to 16 years
of age) with upper-limb reductions (one traumatic and
eight congenital) participated in this study and were fit-
ted with a low-cost 3D-printed prosthetic hand. Of the
11 participants, nine performed the laboratory visits and
two were distance participants. A comparison between
anthropometric measurements of the upper limbs taken
from photographs and those taken directly on the upper
limbs were reported for only nine local participants. In-
clusion criteria included boys and girls from 3 to 17 years
of age with unilateral carpus upper-limb reductions,
missing some or all fingers, and wrist range of motion of
the affected wrist greater than 20°. Exclusion criteria in-
cluded upper extremity injury within the past month
and any medical conditions that would contraindicate
the use of our prosthetic hand prototype, such as skin
abrasions and musculoskeletal injuries. The study was
Figure 1 Prosthetic hand (Cyborg Beast). A: Top view (A1: Tensioner dial, A2: Lift nylon cords, A3: Chicago screws, A4: Tension balance system)
and B: Bottom view (B1: Forearm adjustable Velcro strap, B2: Hand adjustable Velcro strap).
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10 Page 2 of 8
approved by the Creighton University Institutional Review
Board and all the subjects completed a medical history
questionnaire. All parents and children were informed
about the study and parents signed a parental permission
form. For children 6 to 16, an assent was explained by the
principal investigator and signed by the children and their
parents. Written informed consent from the parents was
also obtained in order to publish the images shown in the
present investigation. In addition, detailed safety guide-
lines were given to the parents regarding the use and care
of the prosthetic hand.
3D-printed prosthetic hand characteristics and usage
The low-cost 3D-printed prosthetic hand named “Cyborg
Beast”(Figure 1) was designed using a modeling software
program (Blender 7.2, Blender Foundation, Amsterdam,
Netherlands) and manufactured in the researcher’slabo-
ratory using desktop 3D printers (Makerbot Replicator
2X, Makerbot Industries, Brooklyn, NY, and Ultimaker 2,
Ultimaker B.V., Geldermalsen, The Netherlands). Elastic
cords placed inside the dorsal aspect of the fingers provide
passive finger extension. Finger flexion is driven by non-
elastic cords along the palmar surface of each finger and is
activated through 20-30° of wrist flexion. The result is a
composite fist (flexing the fingers towards the palm) for
gross grasp. The materials used for printing our prosthetic
hand are polylactide (PLA) plastic and acrylonitrile buta-
diene styrene (ABS). Other components of the prosthetic
hand include Chicago screws of various sizes, 1 mm lift
nylon cord, 1.5 mm elastic cord, Velcro, medical-grade
firm padded foam, protective skin sock, and a dial ten-
sioner system (Mid power reel M3, Boa Technology Inc.,
Denver, Colorado). The majority of these materials are
available at local hardware stores or online. The present
cost of materials is about $50 USD. The average time to
fully assemble the prosthetic hand design is approximately
2. 5 hours. The weight of a fully assembled hand at a
140% of its original size is 184.2 grams. A similar device
costs approximately $4,000 and weighs about 400 grams.
The Cyborg Beast prosthetic hand is well suited for ac-
tivities that involved the manipulation of light objects
using lateral, power (composite), and spherical prehen-
sile patterns.
Justification for the design and use of the 3D-printed
prosthetic hand are low cost, easy usage, easy fitting,
easy assembly, and visually appealing to children. The
fitting procedures for the prosthetic hand require a few
simple anthropometric measures of both limbs (Figure 2)
to properly scale the prosthetic device. The files for the
design are available online on the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) 3D print exchange website (http://3dprint.
nih.gov/discover/3dpx-000524) and Thingiverse (http://
www.thingiverse.com/thing:261462). All families and
children participating in this study completed a short
survey. The survey was developed to estimate the impact
of this prosthetic device, including items related to qual-
ity of life, daily usage, and types of activities performed.
The survey has not been statistically validated, but pro-
vides useful information related to usage and perception
about improvements in quality of life. After approxi-
mately one to three months of using the prosthetic hand,
11 children and their parents reported some increases in
quality of life (four indicated this was significant and
seven indicated a small increase), while one indicated no
change. Nine children reported using the hand one to
two hours a day, three reported using the prosthetic hand
more than two hours, and one reported using the hand
only when needed. Furthermore, children reported using
the prosthetic hand just for fun (n = 10), for activities at
home (n = 9), to play (n = 6), for school activities (n = 4),
and to perform sports (n = 2).
Proposed distance-fitting procedure
Theprosthetichand(Figure1)wasdesignedtoallow
easy fitting with minimal anthropometric measurement
requirements, which include hand length (tip of the
middle finger to center of the wrist joint, Figure 2C1and
C5), palm width (widest region of the palm above the
base of the thumb, Figure 2C2), forearm length (center
of the wrist joint to center of the elbow joint, Figure 2C3
and C6), forearm width at three-fourths (width of the
forearm at proximal three-fourths of the length of the
Figure 2 Three photographs of upper limbs. A: wrist extension (A1: non-affected, A2 affected), B: wrist flexion (B1: non-affected, B2: affected),
and C: Top view (C1: Non-affected hand length, C2: Non-affected hand width, C3: Non-affected forearm length, C4: Non-affected forearm width,
C5: Affected hand length, C6: Affected hand width, C7: Affected forearm length, and C8: Affected forearm width).
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10 Page 3 of 8
forearm proximal to the wrist, Figure 2C4 and C7), and
range of motion of the wrists (extension and flexion,
Figure 2A1 and A1). The proposed distance-fitting proced-
ure involves extracting all these required measurements
from three photographs of the upper limbs (Figure 2).
To compare the anthropometric measurements taken
directly from the subject’s upper limbs with those ex-
tracted from photographs, a trained occupational the-
rapist took the required anthropometric measurements
directly from the subject’s upper limbs using a standard
tape measure and goniometer. Three photographs of the
upper limbs were taken as shown in Figure 2. All pic-
tures included a ruler and were taken directly above the
arms and included the entire forearm up to the elbow.
To measure range of motion of the wrist, participants
extended (Figure 2A) and flexed (Figure 2B) their wrists
as far as possible. In addition, a reference line was drawn
over the participant’s wrist joint of the non-affected
hand (Figure 2C). An image editing program (ImageJ,
version 1.46, NIH) was used to assess hand length, palm
width, forearm length, forearm width at three-fourths,
and range of motion of the wrists for flexion and exten-
sion (Figure 2). All anthropometric measurements were
taken directly from the subject’s upper limbs and com-
pared to those extracted from photographs using an image
editing program. All measurements were expressed in
centimeters and calibrated using the ruler included in
the image.
After saving the images files with the calibrated mea-
surements, they were imported as planes in Blender
(Figure3).CalibrationofthemetricscaleonBlender
was performed by changing the default unit (meter) to
centimeters by adjusting the scale to 0.001. The image
plane was resized to match the size of the 1 cm back-
ground grid on Blender using the ruler on the imported
image plane. The accuracy of the calibrations was con-
firmed using the interactive ruler tool on Blender, per-
forming several measurements over the ruler included in
the image plane (Figure 3). After the image plane was cali-
brated, a sizing chart was used to estimate the predicted
size of the prosthetic hand expressed as a percentage of its
original size (Figure 4). MakerWare software (Makerbot
Industries, Brooklyn, NY) was used to size the prosthetic
hand to the desired scale (%) using the scaling function.
The sizing chart was developed to provide an easy method
to scale the prosthetic hand for the user with no previous
knowledge of CAD programs. For cases in which the
cubic regression equation (Figure 4) was not able to accur-
ately predict the correct size of the prosthetic hand due to
differences in hand morphology, customized adjustments
were made on Blender to ensure the proper fit. All the fit-
ting procedures were performed with the assistance of an
occupational hand therapist and a prosthetist. Thus, it is
recommended to include clinical experts in the process of
fitting the prosthetic device to avoid skin abrasions or
breakdown due to improper fit.
Figure 3 Illustration of an image imported as plane and a Cyborg beast palm scale at 140% for a 16-year-old research participant.
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10 Page 4 of 8
Statistical Analysis
Anthropometric Measurements
Seven separate two-way repeated measures ANOVAs
[2 × 2; hand (affected versus non-affected) × fitting pro-
cedures (direct versus photographs)] were performed to
analyze the data. In addition, the data have also been
presented using the method of Bland and Altman as
describedbypreviousinvestigations[12-14].Pearson
product–moment correlation coefficient was calculated
to examine the correlations between the difference and
the mean of the difference from the mean values shown
in the Bland and Altman plots. A p-value of ≤0.05 was
considered statistically significant for all comparisons.
Results
The results of the two-way repeated measures ANOVAs
showed no significant mean difference between the an-
thropometric measures taken directly on the subject’s
upper limbs and those taken from the photographs
(Table 1). There were no significant two-way interactions
for repeated measures ANOVAs performed for hand ×
fitting procedures. There was a significant main effect,
however, for hand (affected versus non-affected), with no
significant main effect for fitting procedures (direct versus
photographs). When the relationship between scale of the
prosthetic hand (%) versus age (years) was analyzed, our
results indicated that the cubic model was the best-fit for
our sample (Figure 4). The main finding of the survey was
that our prosthetic device may have a significant potential
to positively impact quality of life and daily usage, and can
be incorporated in several activities at home and in school.
The Bland and Altman plots (Figure 5) show 95% limits of
agreements for the anthropometric measurements of the
affected hand and measures of range of motion. The aver-
age discrepancy (represented by a solid line in Figure 5)
for the lengths and widths of the hand and forearm re-
sulted in values close to zero, indicating no major bias.
The limits of agreement (represented by a dotted line in
Figure 5) are narrow and show that these measures tend
to be within 5 mm of each other. The range of motion
Figure 4 Sizing chart for Cyborg Beast prosthetic hand. Instructions: locate the child’s age in the bottom (X axis) and follow the line to
the regression curve and then locate the intercepting line corresponding to the scale % on the left side (Y axis). Example: For a 5-year-old,
the scale % of the Cyborg Beast would be 118% (±1.44%). This cubic regression equation was derived from a mixed sample of 11 children with
ages ranging from 3 to 16 years of age.
Table 1 Mean (±SD) for anthropometric measures and range of motion of the wrists
Measurements Non-affected Affected
Direct Photographs Direct Photographs
Hand Length (cm) 13.83 ± 2.44 13.44 ± 1.73 4.02 ± 1.07 4.25 ± 1.15
Palm Width (cm) 7.00 ± 1.20 6.91 ± 0.95 4.50 ± 0.90 4.54 ± 0.66
Forearm Length (cm) 18.94 ± 3.88 18.94 ± 4.16 16.29 ± 3.41 16.69 ± 4.09
Forearm Width (cm) 6.23 ± 0.85 6.47 ± 1.12 5.57 ± 0.77 5.54 ± 0.59
Wrist Range of Motion Flexion (°) 76.00 ± 10.27 75.33 ± 11.01 56.44 ± 13.15 59.76 ± 13.95
Wrist Range of Motion Extension (°) 76.44 ± 5.7 76.00 ± 6.96 45.67 ± 33.47 43.56 ± 33.29
The results of the two-way repeated measures ANOVAs showed no significant (p >0.05) mean difference between the anthropometric measures taken directly on
the subject’s upper limbs and those taken from photographs. There were no significant two-way interactions for repeated measures ANOVAs performed for hand
x fitting procedures. There was a significant main effect for hand (affected versus non-affected), with no significant main effect for fitting procedures (direct
versus photographs).
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10 Page 5 of 8
measurements, however, presented a small bias (average
discrepancy values greater than zero) and wider limits of
agreements, with about 10° difference between methods.
No trends were found and the correlations between the
difference and mean of the difference were not significant,
ranging from 0.04 to 0.53 (Figure 5).
Discussion
The results of the present investigation indicated that
there were no mean differences between anthropometric
measures taken directly from the subject’s upper limbs
and those extracted from photographs (Table 1). The
Bland and Altman plots (Figure 5) show no major bias
and narrow limits of agreements for lengths and widths
and small bias and wider limits of agreements for the
range of motion measurements. Furthermore, the survey
indicated that the prosthetic device may have a signifi-
cant potential to positively impact quality of life and
daily usage in several activities at home or school. The
fitting procedures of our prosthetic hand design require
minimal anthropometric measurements of the upper
limbs for proper scaling and fitting. Most fitting proce-
dures required for prosthetic hands include wrap cast-
ing using plaster bandages placed over the affected limb
[2]. More recently, 3D scanning has also been used for
the development of different type of prostheses and or-
thoses [11,15,16]. Casting procedures require the physical
presence of the individual needing the prosthetic hand
and the health care professional in the same physical loca-
tion, which may not be possible for patients living in rural
or isolated areas. 3D scanning procedures required so-
phisticated equipment and technical knowledge to per-
form the measurements. Furthermore, both techniques
require the patient to visit the health care facilities for
proper fitting procedures.
The results from the present investigation provide a
novel distance-fitting procedure for a low-cost 3D-printed
prosthetic hand for children with upper-limb differences.
Image editing software to extract information from digital
images has been used for a wide range of disciplines, in-
cluding molecular biology and archeology [17,18]. The
present investigation applied image editing techniques to
extract anthropometric data and 3D modeling applications
to develop a novel distance-fitting procedure. The recent
popularity and low cost of desktop 3D printers makes
the prosthetic hand described in the current investi-
gation readily accessible. The proposed distance-fitting
procedures can make this device accessible to a great
number of children in need of this type of device around
the globe. These procedures, however, must be performed
with caution, since inaccurate scaling or significant errors
in the measurements could affect the function or fitting
of the 3D-printed prosthetic hand. Overall, this low-
cost prosthetic hand and the ability to fit this device at
Figure 5 Bland and Altman plots for anthropometric and range of motion measurements taken directly from the subject’s upper limbs
and those taken from photographs.
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10 Page 6 of 8
adistancerepresentalow-costalternativeforchildren
in developing countries and children from uninsured or
economically disadvantaged families.
Conclusion
This investigation provides a description of a low-cost
3D-printed prosthetic hand for children and proposes a
distance-fitting procedure. The Cyborg Beast prosthetic
hand and the proposed distance-fitting procedure repre-
sent a possible low-cost alternative for children in devel-
oping countries and those with little or no access to
health care providers. Our prosthetic device may have a
significant potential to positively impact quality of life
and daily usage. Further studies should examine the
functionality, validity, durability, benefits, and rejection
rate of this low-cost 3D-printed hand design.
Consent
All parents and children were informed about the study
and signed a parental permission. For children 6 to 16,
an assent was explained by the principal investigator
and signed by the children and their parents. Written
informed consent from the parents was obtained in or-
der to publish the images shown in the present inves-
tigation. Furthermore, detailed safety guidelines were
given to the parents regarding the use and care of the
prosthetic hand.
Abbreviations
3D: Three-dimensional; CAD: Computer-aided design; ABS: Acrylonitrile
butadiene styrene; PLA: Polylactide; ANOVA: Analysis of variance.
Competing interests
JZ is the designer of the prosthetic hand Cyborg Beast and partially funded
this study with start-up funds. DK, JS, AC, and MP participated in the
refinement and improvement of the prosthetic hand.
Author’s information
JZ is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Exercise Science and Pre
Health professions at Creighton University, director of the 3D Research &
Innovation Laboratory, and co-director of the Human Movement Laboratory.
JZ is a member of the Association of Children’s Prosthetic-Orthotic Clinics
and the American College of Sports Medicine.
DK is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Exercise Science and Pre
Health professions and affiliated with the Physical Therapy Department at
Creighton University. DK is a member of the American Society of
Biomechanics and co-director of the Human Movement Laboratory.
JP is an occupational therapist, certified hand therapist at CHI Health
Creighton University Medical Center and an adjunct faculty at the
Department of Occupational Therapy at Creighton University.
JS is a doctoral student from the Department of Occupational Therapy at
Creighton University.
MP is an undergraduate student from the Department of Exercise Science
and Pre Health Professions at Creighton University.
AC is an undergraduate student from the Department of Exercise Science
and Pre Health Professions at Creighton University.
CF is an associate Professor of Pediatrics at Creighton University. CF is
Children’s Physicians Medical Director-HEROES Program and an Associate
Program Director for UNMC/Creighton University/Children’s Hospital and
Medical Center.
Authors’contributions
All the authors reviewed and contributed to the manuscript. JZ was the
originator of the study concept and design, study methodology, and
manuscript draft. DK, JP, JS, and MP were involved in data collection. DK, JP,
and MP contributed to design improvements of the prosthetic hand. MP
printed most of the parts of the prosthetic hands for the research
participants and performed substantial improvements. JZ, JP, AC, and MP
assembled the prosthetic hands. DK performed part of the data analysis.
All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank Richard Van As and Ivan Owen for their contribution
in the development of the 3D-printed prosthetic hand named Robohand.
Special thanks to all members of the online group “e-NABLE”(http://
enablingthefuture.org/) for their feedback and constant support. We also
would like to thank the parents and their children for participating in our
study. Thanks to the students from the 3D Research & Innovation Laboratory
at Creighton University (http://www.cyborgbeast.org/) who helped with data
collection. This study was funded by the NASA Nebraska Space Grant Office.
Author details
1
Department of Exercise Science and Pre Health Professions, Creighton
University, Omaha, NE 68178, USA.
2
CHI Health Creighton University Medical
Center, Omaha, NE 68131, USA.
3
Department of Occupational Therapy,
Creighton University, Omaha, NE 68178, USA.
4
Children’s Hospital and
Medical Center, Omaha, NE 68114, USA.
Received: 8 August 2014 Accepted: 31 December 2014
References
1. Krebs DE, Edelstein JE, Thornby MA. Prosthetic management of children
with limb deficiencies. Phys Ther. 1991;71:920–34.
2. Bray JJ. University of California Los Angeles. Prosthetics-Orthotics Education
Program.: Prosthetic principles, upper extremity amputations : fabrication
and fitting principles. Los Angeles: Prosthetics-Orthotics Education Program,
Division of Orthopedic Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles; 1970.
3. Shaperman J, Leblanc M, Setoguchi Y, McNeal DR. Is body powered
operation of upper limb prostheses feasible for young limb deficient
children? Prosthetics Orthot Int. 1995;19:165–75.
4. Marshall JG. Partial hand and functional prosthesis. JACPOC. 2000;6:1.
5. Scotland TR, Galway HR. A long-term review of children with congenital
and acquired upper limb deficiency. J Bone Joint Surgery British Vol.
1983;65:346–9.
6. Davids JR, Wagner LV, Meyer LC, Blackhurst DW. Prosthetic management of
children with unilateral congenital below-elbow deficiency. J Bone Joint
Surg. 2006;88:1294–300.
7. Bethge M, von Groote P, Giustini A, Gutenbrunner C. The World Report on
Disability: a challenge for rehabilitation medicine. Am J Phys Med Rehabil.
2014;93:S4–11.
8. Cignini P, Giorlandino C, Padula F, Dugo N, Cafa EV, Spata A. Epidemiology
and risk factors of amniotic band syndrome, or ADAM sequence. J Prenatal
Med. 2012;6:59–63.
9. Parker SE, Mai CT, Canfield MA, Rickard R, Wang Y, Meyer RE, et al.
Updated National Birth Prevalence estimates for selected birth defects in
the United States, 2004–2006. Birth Defects Res Part A, Clin Mole Teratol.
2010;88:1008–16.
10. Resnik L. Development and testing of new upper-limb prosthetic devices:
research designs for usability testing. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48:697–706.
11. Rengier F, Mehndiratta A, von Tengg-Kobligk H, Zechmann CM,
Unterhinninghofen R, Kauczor HU, et al. 3D printing based on imaging
data: review of medical applications. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg.
2010;5:335–41.
12. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between
two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–10.
13. McLaughlin P. Testing agreement between a new method and the gold
standard-how do we test? J Biomech. 2013;46:2757–60.
14. Howell DC. Statistical methods for psychology. 4th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth
Publishing Company; 1997.
15. Vera C, Barrero C, Shockley W, Rothenberger S, Minsley G, Drago C.
Prosthetic Reconstruction of a Patient with an Acquired Nasal Defect Using
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10 Page 7 of 8
Extraoral Implants and a CAD/CAM Copy-Milled Bar. J Prosthodont.
2014;23:582–7.
16. Dombroski CE, Balsdon ME, Froats A. The use of a low cost 3D scanning
and printing tool in the manufacture of custom-made foot orthoses: a
preliminary study. BMC Res Notes. 2014;7:443.
17. Doneus M, Verhoeven G, Atzberger C, Wess M, RušM. New ways to extract
archaeological information from hyperspectral pixels. J Archaeol Sci.
2014;52:84–96.
18. Hartig SM: Basic image analysis and manipulation in ImageJ. Current
protocols in molecular biology/edited by Frederick M Ausubel [et al.] 2013,
Chapter 14:Unit14 15.
Submit your next manuscript to BioMed Central
and take full advantage of:
• Convenient online submission
• Thorough peer review
• No space constraints or color figure charges
• Immediate publication on acceptance
• Inclusion in PubMed, CAS, Scopus and Google Scholar
• Research which is freely available for redistribution
Submit your manuscript at
www.biomedcentral.com/submit
Zuniga et al. BMC Research Notes (2015) 8:10 Page 8 of 8
