Literature DB >> 11006404

Comparison of methods for the calculation of energy storage and return in a dynamic elastic response prosthesis.

M D Geil1, M Parnianpour, P Quesada, N Berme, S Simon.   

Abstract

The standard method used to calculate the ankle joint power contains deficiencies when applied to dynamic elastic response prosthetic feet. The standard model, using rotational power and inverse dynamics, assumes a fixed joint center and cannot account for energy storage, dissipation, and return. This study compared the standard method with new analysis models. First, assumptions of inverse dynamics were avoided by directly measuring ankle forces and moments. Second, the ankle center of rotation was corrected by including translational power terms. Analysis with below-knee amputees revealed that the conventional method overestimates ankle forces and moments as well as prosthesis energy storage and return. Results for efficiency of energy return were varied. Large differences between models indicate the standard method may have serious inadequacies in the analysis of certain prosthetic feet. This research is the first application of the new models to prosthetic feet, and suggests the need for additional research in gait analysis with energy-storing prostheses.

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11006404     DOI: 10.1016/s0021-9290(00)00102-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.712


  8 in total

1.  The effect of prosthetic foot push-off on mechanical loading associated with knee osteoarthritis in lower extremity amputees.

Authors:  David C Morgenroth; Ava D Segal; Karl E Zelik; Joseph M Czerniecki; Glenn K Klute; Peter G Adamczyk; Michael S Orendurff; Michael E Hahn; Steven H Collins; Art D Kuo
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2011-07-30       Impact factor: 2.840

2.  Use of a powered ankle-foot prosthesis reduces the metabolic cost of uphill walking and improves leg work symmetry in people with transtibial amputations.

Authors:  Jana R Montgomery; Alena M Grabowski
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 4.118

3.  Effect of alignment changes on socket reaction moments while walking in transtibial prostheses with energy storage and return feet.

Authors:  Toshiki Kobayashi; Adam K Arabian; Michael S Orendurff; Teri G Rosenbaum-Chou; David A Boone
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2013-11-13       Impact factor: 2.063

4.  Prosthetic forefoot and heel stiffness across consecutive foot stiffness categories and sizes.

Authors:  Anne T Turner; Elizabeth G Halsne; Joshua M Caputo; Carl S Curran; Andrew H Hansen; Brian J Hafner; David C Morgenroth
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-10       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Ankle and foot power in gait analysis: Implications for science, technology and clinical assessment.

Authors:  Karl E Zelik; Eric C Honert
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2018-04-18       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Recycling energy to restore impaired ankle function during human walking.

Authors:  Steven H Collins; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Walking speed related joint kinetic alterations in trans-tibial amputees: impact of hydraulic 'ankle' damping.

Authors:  Alan R De Asha; Ramesh Munjal; Jai Kulkarni; John G Buckley
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 4.262

8.  Energy storing and return prosthetic feet improve step length symmetry while preserving margins of stability in persons with transtibial amputation.

Authors:  Han Houdijk; Daphne Wezenberg; Laura Hak; Andrea Giovanni Cutti
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 4.262

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.