Abstract
Introduction
Creating an upper limb prosthetic that accurately replaces a missing limb in both ability and embodiment poses significant challenges. The delivery of functionally useful non-invasive sensory feedback has proven difficult, balancing the need for accurately communicating sensations with minimal burden to the user. This work explores the role of mechanoreceptors in upper limb prosthetic haptic feedback, critically evaluating the literature and how specific feedback modalities can replicate natural touch perception.
Methods
The discussion is informed by sensory neuroscience, prosthetic technology, and non-invasive haptic feedback. A systematic search was performed utilising a Boolean search string to identify key words such as “prosthetics”, “haptic feedback”, and sensory feedback methods. By comparing the physiological basis of touch with current prosthetic haptic feedback solutions, this work highlights opportunities for refining sensory feedback.
Results
Of the 4 mechanoreceptor types associated with touch in the upper limbs, only Pacinian Corpuscles can detect vibration at high frequencies and do not play a role in initial touch or grip force (Iheanacho & Vellipuram, 2025). Despite this, 53/86 articles reported haptic feedback primarily utilising vibrotactile stimulus. This contrasts with 7/86 articles that utilise mechanotactile feedback and activate the touch associated mechanoreceptors. Additionally, as shown in Figure 1, only 103/1045 total participants were amputees.
Conclusion
The predominantly utilised stimulation method (vibrotactile) does not activate the same mechanoreceptor types that activate the reportedly most important elements of sensation – initial touch and grip force (Smither et al., 2022). By activating the “default” neural pathways associated with touch sensation, the sensorimotor cortical representation of a missing limb can be developed/restored (Wesselink et al., 2019). This may facilitate better embodiment of a prosthetic and contribute to a reduction in upper limb prosthetic abandonment rates (Salminger et al., 2022). Findings of current research, while useful, need to be validated with amputee populations.
Creating an upper limb prosthetic that accurately replaces a missing limb in both ability and embodiment poses significant challenges. The delivery of functionally useful non-invasive sensory feedback has proven difficult, balancing the need for accurately communicating sensations with minimal burden to the user. This work explores the role of mechanoreceptors in upper limb prosthetic haptic feedback, critically evaluating the literature and how specific feedback modalities can replicate natural touch perception.
Methods
The discussion is informed by sensory neuroscience, prosthetic technology, and non-invasive haptic feedback. A systematic search was performed utilising a Boolean search string to identify key words such as “prosthetics”, “haptic feedback”, and sensory feedback methods. By comparing the physiological basis of touch with current prosthetic haptic feedback solutions, this work highlights opportunities for refining sensory feedback.
Results
Of the 4 mechanoreceptor types associated with touch in the upper limbs, only Pacinian Corpuscles can detect vibration at high frequencies and do not play a role in initial touch or grip force (Iheanacho & Vellipuram, 2025). Despite this, 53/86 articles reported haptic feedback primarily utilising vibrotactile stimulus. This contrasts with 7/86 articles that utilise mechanotactile feedback and activate the touch associated mechanoreceptors. Additionally, as shown in Figure 1, only 103/1045 total participants were amputees.
Conclusion
The predominantly utilised stimulation method (vibrotactile) does not activate the same mechanoreceptor types that activate the reportedly most important elements of sensation – initial touch and grip force (Smither et al., 2022). By activating the “default” neural pathways associated with touch sensation, the sensorimotor cortical representation of a missing limb can be developed/restored (Wesselink et al., 2019). This may facilitate better embodiment of a prosthetic and contribute to a reduction in upper limb prosthetic abandonment rates (Salminger et al., 2022). Findings of current research, while useful, need to be validated with amputee populations.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Number of pages | 3 |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Oct 2025 |
| Event | IUPESM World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering 2025 - Adelaide Convention Centre, Adelaide, Australia Duration: 29 Sept 2025 → 4 Oct 2025 https://wc2025.org/ |
Conference
| Conference | IUPESM World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering 2025 |
|---|---|
| Abbreviated title | IUPESM 2025 |
| Country/Territory | Australia |
| City | Adelaide |
| Period | 29/09/25 → 4/10/25 |
| Internet address |
Keywords
- prosthetics
- upper-limb
- sensory feedback
- innovative technologies