Literature DB >> 12084537

Energy storage and return prostheses: does patient perception correlate with biomechanical analysis?

Brian J Hafner1, Joan E Sanders, Joseph Czerniecki, John Fergason.   

Abstract

The development and prescription of energy storage and return prosthetic feet in favor of conventional feet is largely based upon prosthetist and amputee experience. Regretfully, the comparative biomechanical analysis of energy storage and return and conventional prosthetic feet is rarely a motivation to either the technical development or clinical prescription of such devices. The development and prescription of prosthetic feet without supportive scientific evidence is likely due to the conflicting or non-significant results often presented in the scientific literature. Despite the sizeable history of comparative prosthetic literature and continued analysis of prosthetic components, the link between clinical experience and scientific evidence remains largely unexplored.A review of the comparative analysis literature evaluating energy storage and return and conventional prosthetic feet is presented to illustrate consistencies between the perceptive assessments and the objective biomechanical data. Results suggest that while experimental methodologies may limit the statistical significance of objective gait analysis results, consistent trends in temporal, kinetic, and kinematic parameters correlate well with perceptive impressions of these feet. These correlations provide insight to subtle changes in gait parameters that are deemed neither clinically nor statistically significant, yet are perceived by amputees to affect their preference for and performance of prosthetic feet during locomotion. Acknowledging and targeting areas of perceptive significance will help researchers develop more structured protocols for energy storage and return prosthesis evaluation as well as provide clinicians with information needed to enhance the appropriateness of their clinical recommendations. Expanding test environments to measure activities of perceived improvement such as high-velocity motions, stair ascent/descent, and uneven ground locomotion will provide a more appropriate assessment of the conditions for which energy storage and return prosthetic feet were designed. Concentrating research to specific test populations by age or amputation etiologies can overcome statistical limitations imposed by small study samples. Finally, directing research toward the areas of gait adaptation, heel performance, and the temporal release of energy in energy storage and return feet may reinforce the selection and utilization of advanced prosthetic components. These enhancements to current biomechanical analyses may serve to reduce the boundaries of perceptive significance and provide clinicians, designers, and researchers with the supportive data needed to prescribe, design, and evaluate energy storage and return prosthetic feet.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12084537     DOI: 10.1016/s0268-0033(02)00020-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)        ISSN: 0268-0033            Impact factor:   2.063


  18 in total

1.  Sensitivity of biomechanical outcomes to independent variations of hindfoot and forefoot stiffness in foot prostheses.

Authors:  Peter Gabriel Adamczyk; Michelle Roland; Michael E Hahn
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 2.161

2.  Experimental and computational analysis of composite ankle-foot orthosis.

Authors:  Dequan Zou; Tao He; Michael Dailey; Kirk E Smith; Matthew J Silva; David R Sinacore; Michael J Mueller; Mary K Hastings
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2014

Review 3.  How a diverse research ecosystem has generated new rehabilitation technologies: Review of NIDILRR's Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers.

Authors:  David J Reinkensmeyer; Sarah Blackstone; Cathy Bodine; John Brabyn; David Brienza; Kevin Caves; Frank DeRuyter; Edmund Durfee; Stefania Fatone; Geoff Fernie; Steven Gard; Patricia Karg; Todd A Kuiken; Gerald F Harris; Mike Jones; Yue Li; Jordana Maisel; Michael McCue; Michelle A Meade; Helena Mitchell; Tracy L Mitzner; James L Patton; Philip S Requejo; James H Rimmer; Wendy A Rogers; W Zev Rymer; Jon A Sanford; Lawrence Schneider; Levin Sliker; Stephen Sprigle; Aaron Steinfeld; Edward Steinfeld; Gregg Vanderheiden; Carolee Winstein; Li-Qun Zhang; Thomas Corfman
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 4.262

4.  The effects of a controlled energy storage and return prototype prosthetic foot on transtibial amputee ambulation.

Authors:  Ava D Segal; Karl E Zelik; Glenn K Klute; David C Morgenroth; Michael E Hahn; Michael S Orendurff; Peter G Adamczyk; Steven H Collins; Arthur D Kuo; Joseph M Czerniecki
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2011-11-17       Impact factor: 2.161

5.  The effects of increased prosthetic ankle motions on the gait of persons with bilateral transtibial amputations.

Authors:  Po-Fu Su; Steven A Gard; Robert D Lipschutz; Todd A Kuiken
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.159

6.  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

7.  Considering passive mechanical properties and patient user motor performance in lower limb prosthesis design optimization to enhance rehabilitation outcomes.

Authors:  Matthew J Major; Nicholas P Fey
Journal:  Phys Ther Rev       Date:  2017-07-17

8.  Once-per-step control of ankle-foot prosthesis push-off work reduces effort associated with balance during walking.

Authors:  Myunghee Kim; Steven H Collins
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 4.262

9.  Prosthetic ankle push-off work reduces metabolic rate but not collision work in non-amputee walking.

Authors:  Joshua M Caputo; Steven H Collins
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-12-03       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Maintenance of muscle strength retains a normal metabolic cost in simulated walking after transtibial limb loss.

Authors:  Elizabeth Russell Esposito; Ross H Miller
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-12       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.