Literature DB >> 22100728

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

Ava D Segal1, 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.   

Abstract

The lack of functional ankle musculature in lower limb amputees contributes to the reduced prosthetic ankle push-off, compensations at other joints and more energetically costly gait commonly observed in comparison to non-amputees. A variety of energy storing and return prosthetic feet have been developed to address these issues but have not been shown to sufficiently improve amputee biomechanics and energetic cost, perhaps because the timing and magnitude of energy return is not controlled. The goal of this study was to examine how a prototype microprocessor-controlled prosthetic foot designed to store some of the energy during loading and return it during push-off affects amputee gait. Unilateral transtibial amputees wore the Controlled Energy Storage and Return prosthetic foot (CESR), a conventional foot (CONV), and their previously prescribed foot (PRES) in random order. Three-dimensional gait analysis and net oxygen consumption were collected as participants walked at constant speed. The CESR foot demonstrated increased energy storage during early stance, increased prosthetic foot peak push-off power and work, increased prosthetic limb center of mass (COM) push-off work and decreased intact limb COM collision work compared to CONV and PRES. The biological contribution of the positive COM work for CESR was reduced compared to CONV and PRES. However, the net metabolic cost for CESR did not change compared to CONV and increased compared to PRES, which may partially reflect the greater weight, lack of individualized size and stiffness and relatively less familiarity for CESR and CONV. Controlled energy storage and return enhanced prosthetic push-off, but requires further design modifications to improve amputee walking economy. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22100728      PMCID: PMC4302415          DOI: 10.1016/j.humov.2011.08.005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Mov Sci        ISSN: 0167-9457            Impact factor:   2.161


  43 in total

Review 1.  A systematic literature review of the effect of different prosthetic components on human functioning with a lower-limb prosthesis.

Authors:  Harmen van der Linde; Cheriel J Hofstad; Alexander C H Geurts; Klaas Postema; Jan H B Geertzen; Jacques van Limbeek
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2004-07

Review 2.  Energetic consequences of walking like an inverted pendulum: step-to-step transitions.

Authors:  Arthur D Kuo; J Maxwell Donelan; Andy Ruina
Journal:  Exerc Sport Sci Rev       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 6.230

3.  Biomechanical comparison of the energy-storing capabilities of SACH and Carbon Copy II prosthetic feet during the stance phase of gait in a person with below-knee amputation.

Authors:  A E Barr; K L Siegel; J V Danoff; C L McGarvey; A Tomasko; I Sable; S J Stanhope
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1992-05

4.  A collisional model of the energetic cost of support work qualitatively explains leg sequencing in walking and galloping, pseudo-elastic leg behavior in running and the walk-to-run transition.

Authors:  Andy Ruina; John E A Bertram; Manoj Srinivasan
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2005-06-14       Impact factor: 2.691

5.  The effect of five prosthetic feet on the gait and loading of the sound limb in dysvascular below-knee amputees.

Authors:  R D Snyder; C M Powers; C Fontaine; J Perry
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  1995-11

6.  Mechanical work adaptations of above-knee amputee ambulation.

Authors:  R E Seroussi; A Gitter; J M Czerniecki; K Weaver
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 3.966

7.  Specialized prostheses for activities. An update.

Authors:  H D Romo
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Kinetic analysis of the lower limbs during walking: what information can be gained from a three-dimensional model?

Authors:  J J Eng; D A Winter
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Comprehensive analysis of dynamic elastic response feet: Seattle Ankle/Lite Foot versus SACH foot.

Authors:  J F Lehmann; R Price; S Boswell-Bessette; A Dralle; K Questad
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 3.966

10.  Influence of prosthetic foot design on sound limb loading in adults with unilateral below-knee amputations.

Authors:  C M Powers; L Torburn; J Perry; E Ayyappa
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 3.966

View more
  17 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

Review 2.  A unified perspective on ankle push-off in human walking.

Authors:  Karl E Zelik; Peter G Adamczyk
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2016-12-01       Impact factor: 3.312

3.  A simulation-based analysis of the effects of variable prosthesis stiffness on interface dynamics between the prosthetic socket and residual limb.

Authors:  Michael A McGeehan; Peter G Adamczyk; Kieran M Nichols; Michael E Hahn
Journal:  J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng       Date:  2022-07-15

4.  Metabolically efficient walking assistance using optimized timed forces at the waist.

Authors:  Prokopios Antonellis; Arash Mohammadzadeh Gonabadi; Sara A Myers; Iraklis I Pipinos; Philippe Malcolm
Journal:  Sci Robot       Date:  2022-03-16

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.  The role of series ankle elasticity in bipedal walking.

Authors:  Karl E Zelik; Tzu-Wei P Huang; Peter G Adamczyk; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  J Theor Biol       Date:  2013-12-21       Impact factor: 2.691

7.  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

8.  Mechanisms of Gait Asymmetry Due to Push-Off Deficiency in Unilateral Amputees.

Authors:  Peter Gabriel Adamczyk; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 3.802

9.  Effects of a powered ankle-foot prosthesis on kinetic loading of the unaffected leg during level-ground walking.

Authors:  Alena M Grabowski; Susan D'Andrea
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 4.262

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.