Finger Prostheses: A Comprehensive Guide for New Users

Finger loss—whether due to trauma, infection, or congenital conditions—can have a profound impact on both function and identity. For new amputee patients, navigating the options for finger prostheses can feel overwhelming. However, modern prosthetic technology offers a wide spectrum of solutions, ranging from highly aesthetic silicone restorations to advanced functional devices that restore grip, strength, and dexterity. 

This guide provides an overview of finger prostheses, various types, features, attachment methods, considerations for new users, and what leading manufacturers are offering. It is intended to help new patients and referring clinicians understand the options and make informed decisions. 

Understanding the Role of Finger Prostheses 

Finger prostheses serve three primary purposes: 

1. Functional restoration – improving grip strength, dexterity, and hand biomechanics. Even partial restoration can significantly improve activities such as typing, gripping utensils, or handling small objects. Silicone finger prostheses, for example, provide counter-support for grasping and fine motor tasks like handling coins or using a keyboard. 

2. Aesthetic restoration – recreating natural appearance and symmetry 

3. Psychological rehabilitation – supporting confidence, social integration and identity 

Types of Finger Prostheses 

Finger prostheses can be broadly classified into three main categories: passive (cosmetic), body-driven (mechanical), and myoelectric (bionic). Each serves different needs. 

Passive (Cosmetic) Finger Prostheses 

Passive prostheses are the most common option for new amputees. 

Key Features: 

• Custom-made from medical-grade silicone or prefabricated PVC 

• Highly realistic skin tone, texture, and nail replication. Less definition with PVC types. 

• Lightweight and flexible with natural feel. 

• Typically non-articulating or slightly positionable 

Benefits: 

• Excellent aesthetic outcome 

• Improved social confidence and body image 

• Provides some passive opposition for grasping or pushing objects 

• Protects sensitive residual tissue 

Custom silicone prostheses are designed to closely replicate the appearance of natural skin, including colour gradients and surface details, often making them visually indistinguishable at a glance. 

Limitations: 

• Limited active function 

• Reduced durability under heavy load 

• May require periodic replacement due to wear or discoloration 

Best suited for: 

• Distal amputations 

• Patients prioritising appearance 

• Low to moderate functional demands 

Body-Driven (Mechanical) Finger Prostheses 

Body-driven prostheses represent a significant advancement in functional restoration. 

Examples include devices from the Naked Prosthetics range: 

• PIPDriver™ 

• MCPDriver™ 

• ThumbDriver™ 

Key Features: 

• Mechanical linkage systems driven by residual joint motion 

• Constructed from durable materials such as nylon or stainless steel 

• Waterproof and robust 

• Often include conductive tips for touchscreen use 

These devices use remaining joint movement to drive prosthetic motion, enabling intuitive and natural finger function. 

Benefits: 

• Restores active grip patterns (pinch, cylindrical, lateral) 

• High strength and durability 

• Suitable for manual work and active lifestyles 

• Immediate proprioceptive feedback (no electronics required) 

Limitations: 

• Requires sufficient residual limb length and joint mobility 

• More mechanical appearance (less cosmetic realism) 

• Higher cost compared to passive options 

Best suited for: 

• Patients prioritising function over aesthetics 

• Occupational or high-demand users 

Positionable (Passive Functional) Prostheses 

These are hybrid devices that sit between cosmetic and fully functional solutions. 

Key Features: 

• Adjustable finger positions using external force 

• Locking mechanisms to maintain grip position 

• Often integrated into partial hand prostheses 

For example, positionable fingers can be flexed manually and locked in place to hold objects, then released via a lever mechanism. 

Benefits: 

• Improved functional utility over purely cosmetic devices 

• Simpler and more affordable than body-driven systems 

• Useful for stabilising objects during bimanual tasks 

Limitations: 

• Not actively powered 

• Requires external adjustment and positioning. 

Myoelectric Partial Hand Prostheses 

While less common for isolated finger loss, myoelectric systems are relevant in multi-digit amputations. 

Examples include systems from Össur and Ottobock: 

• i-Digits® Quantum 

• Multi-articulating bionic fingers 

Key Features: 

• Electrically powered by muscle signals 

• Independent finger movement 

• Multiple grip patterns (up to dozens) 

Benefits: 

• High level of dexterity 

• Customisable grip patterns 

• Advanced functional restoration 

Limitations: 

• High cost 

• Requires training and maintenance 

• Heavier and more complex 

How Finger Prostheses Are Attached 

Suspension and attachment are critical to comfort, function, and long-term success. 

Suction Suspension 

The most common method for silicone prostheses. 

• Achieved through a snug, airtight fit 

• Air is expelled as the prosthesis is donned 

• Provides secure, discreet attachment 

This method is widely used due to its simplicity and reliability. 

Mechanical Suspension 

Used in partial hand or functional prostheses. 

• Includes rings, frames, or harness systems 

• Transfers load through structural components 

• Common in body-driven devices 

Implant-Retained Prostheses (A more advanced option.) 

• Titanium implant anchored into bone 

• External attachment via abutment 

• Provides superior retention and proprioception 

Considerations: 

• Requires surgery 

• Risk of infection 

• Higher cost 

Adhesion and Compression Fit (Common in silicone designs.) 

• Relies on material elasticity and friction 

• Full-contact compression enhances stability 

• Often eliminates need for straps or closures 

Materials Used in Finger Prostheses 

Material selection directly impacts durability, comfort, and realism. 

Silicone 

• Most widely used for cosmetic prostheses 

• Flexible, biocompatible, and lifelike 

• Allows detailed pigmentation and texture 

Nylon 

• Used in functional prostheses 

• Lightweight, strong, and resistant to chemicals 

• Ideal for active users 

Metals (Stainless Steel, Titanium) 

• Provide structural strength 

• Used in mechanical joints and frames 

• Enable high load-bearing capacity 

Common Considerations for New Amputees 

Level of Amputation 

• Distal amputations → better candidates for cosmetic prostheses 

• Proximal amputations → may benefit from functional devices 

Residual Limb Condition 

• Length, shape, and soft tissue quality influence fit 

• Scar tissue and sensitivity must be managed 

Functional Goals 

• Daily living vs occupational demands 

• Fine motor tasks vs heavy-duty activities 

Aesthetic Expectations 

• Highly individual 

• Cultural and personal factors play a role 

Budget and Funding 

• Costs vary significantly 

• Functional devices can be substantially more expensive 

• Check with your Prosthetist if you qualify for funding. 

Complexities in Fitting Finger Prostheses 

Finger prosthetics may appear simple, but they are clinically complex. 

• Precision fitting: Millimetre-level accuracy required for comfort 

• Volume fluctuation: Residual limb changes over time 

• Skin tolerance: Pressure and shear must be managed carefully 

• Alignment: Critical for restoring natural hand biomechanics 

Custom fabrication often involves impressions, trial fittings, and refinement to achieve optimal outcomes. 

Maintenance and Care 

Proper maintenance significantly extends prosthesis lifespan. 

Daily Care 

• Clean with mild soap and water 

• Avoid harsh chemicals 

• Dry thoroughly before use 

Periodic Maintenance 

• Inspect for tears or wear 

• Replace liners or padding as needed 

• Professional servicing for mechanical devices 

Silicone prostheses, in particular, require regular cleaning to prevent staining and maintain appearance. 

Notable Manufacturers 

The finger prosthetics market includes several globally recognised providers: 

Naked Prosthetics 

• Specialises in functional, body-driven finger prostheses 

• Industry-leading mechanical designs 

• Focus on durability and performance 

Point Designs 

• Produces fingers featuring heavy-duty ratcheting mechanisms 

• 3D-printed frames with various suspension options 

Ottobock and Ossur (Livingskin) 

• Provide silicone cosmetic prostheses 

• Highly detailed, custom aesthetic solutions 

Choosing the Right Finger Prosthesis 

There is no “one-size-fits-all” solution. The optimal prosthesis depends on: 

• Clinical presentation 

• User’s goals 

• Lifestyle and occupational needs 

• Budget or funding constraints 

A collaborative approach involving the user, prosthetist and rehabilitation team is essential. 

Final Thoughts 

Finger prostheses have evolved significantly—from purely cosmetic restorations to highly functional, task-specific devices. For new users, the journey begins with understanding the available options and aligning them with personal goals. 

Early intervention, appropriate device selection, and ongoing clinical support can dramatically improve outcomes—not just in function, but in confidence and quality of life. 

A word from Centric Motion

At Centric Motion, the focus remains on delivering personalised, patient-centred prosthetic solutions that balance aesthetics, function, and long-term usability. Give them a call.