title: Do users want to receive a DEKA Arm and why? Overall findings from the Veterans Affairs Study to optimize the DEKA Arm.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  The purposes of this article are (1) to report on the overall desirability of the DEKA Arm by prototype and by level of prosthesis, (2) to report on user-perceived benefits of the DEKA Arm as compared to their current prostheses, and (3) to summarize user concerns about taking the device home.
  
  
  METHODS
  Qualitative content analysis of data from a multiple case study design.
  
  
  METHODS
  This study utilized data from 24 upper-limb amputees fit with a Gen 2 DEKA Arm and 13 fit with a Gen 3 DEKA Arm. Surveys were administered after fitting the DEKA Arm and at the end of training. Subjects recorded audiotaped comments about their experiences. All study sessions were videotaped.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In all, 79% of Gen 2 and 85% of Gen 3 users indicated that either they wanted to receive or might want to receive a DEKA Arm. In total, 95% of Gen 2 and 91% of Gen 3 prior prosthesis users reported that they were able to perform new activities that they were unable to perform with their own device.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  A large majority of subjects wanted a DEKA Arm, although desirability varied by amputation level.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The majority of amputees in this study expressed a desire to receive the DEKA Arm, a device which provides multiple powered degrees of freedom and is operated predominantly by foot controls. The majority reported functional advantages of the DEKA Arm over their existing prostheses.
authors.affiliation: Research, Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, RI, USA Department of Health Services, Policy and Practice, Brown University, USA Linda.Resnik@va.gov.
authors.forename: Linda
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Resnik
authors.affiliation: Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, James A. Haley Veterans Hospital, Tampa, FL, USA.
authors.forename: Gail
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Latlief
authors.affiliation: Research, Providence VA Medical Center, Providence, RI, USA.
authors.forename: Shana L
authors.initials: SL
authors.lastname: Klinger
authors.affiliation: Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, VA NY Harbor Healthcare System, New York, USA.
authors.forename: Nicole
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Sasson
authors.affiliation: Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, Center for the Intrepid, San Antonio, TX, USA.
authors.forename: Lisa S
authors.initials: LS
authors.lastname: Walters
mesh_terms: D000203:Activities of Daily Living; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000674:Amputees / Q000534:rehabilitation*; D001186:Artificial Limbs / Q000145:classification; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017060:Patient Satisfaction; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D012656:Self-Help Devices; D014481:United States; D014493:United States Department of Veterans Affairs; D034941:Upper Extremity / Q000601:surgery*; D014728:Veterans
keywords: Amputation; assistive technology; prosthetics; qualitative; upper limb