Literature DB >> 22773262

Application of self-report and performance-based outcome measures to determine functional differences between four categories of prosthetic feet.

Robert S Gailey1, Ignacio Gaunaurd, Vibhor Agrawal, Adam Finnieston, Christopher O'Toole, Ronald Tolchin.   

Abstract

We examined the application of outcome measures to determine changes in function caused by standardized functional prosthetic gait training and the use of four different prosthetic feet in people with unilateral transtibial limb loss. Two self-report measures (Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire-Mobility Scale [PEQ-13] and Locomotor Capabilities Index [LCI]), and three performance-based measures (Amputee Mobility Predictor with a prosthesis [AMPPRO], 6-minute walk test [6MWT] and step activity monitor [SAM]) were used. Ten people with unilateral transtibial limb loss, five with peripheral vascular disease (PVD) and five without PVD, completed testing. Subjects were tested at baseline and after receiving training with their existing prosthesis and with the study socket and four prosthetic feet, i.e., SACH (solid ankle cushion heel), SAFE (stationary attachment flexible endoskeletal), Talux, and Proprio feet, over 8 to 10 weeks. Training was administered between testing sessions. No differences were detected by the PEQ-13, LCI, 6MWT, or SAM following training and after fitting with test feet. The AMPPRO demonstrated differences following training with the existing prosthesis in the PVD group and between selected feet from baseline testing ( p </= 0.05). Significant differences were found between the PVD and the non-PVD groups (p </= 0.05) in the AMPPRO and 6MWT when using the Proprio foot. Self-report measures were unable to detect differences between prosthetic feet.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22773262     DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2011.04.0077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev        ISSN: 0748-7711


  12 in total

1.  Step Activity and 6-Minute Walk Test Outcomes When Wearing Low-Activity or High-Activity Prosthetic Feet.

Authors:  Shane R Wurdeman; Kendra K Schmid; Sara A Myers; Adam L Jacobsen; Nicholas Stergiou
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 2.159

2.  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

3.  Effects of socket size on metrics of socket fit in trans-tibial prosthesis users.

Authors:  Joan E Sanders; Robert T Youngblood; Brian J Hafner; John C Cagle; Jake B McLean; Christian B Redd; Colin R Dietrich; Marcia A Ciol; Katheryn J Allyn
Journal:  Med Eng Phys       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 2.242

4.  Locomotor activities of individuals with lower-limb amputation.

Authors:  Bantoon Srisuwan; Glenn K Klute
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 1.672

5.  The Conventional Non-Articulated SACH or a Multiaxial Prosthetic Foot for Hypomobile Transtibial Amputees? A Clinical Comparison on Mobility, Balance, and Quality of Life.

Authors:  Francesco Paradisi; Anna Sofia Delussu; Stefano Brunelli; Marco Iosa; Roberto Pellegrini; Daniele Zenardi; Marco Traballesi
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2015-05-11

6.  Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review.

Authors:  Alix Chadwell; Laura Diment; M Micó-Amigo; Dafne Z Morgado Ramírez; Alex Dickinson; Malcolm Granat; Laurence Kenney; Sisary Kheng; Mohammad Sobuh; Robert Ssekitoleko; Peter Worsley
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 4.262

7.  Mobility analysis of AmpuTees (MAAT 5): Impact of five common prosthetic ankle-foot categories for individuals with diabetic/dysvascular amputation.

Authors:  Shane R Wurdeman; Phillip M Stevens; James H Campbell
Journal:  J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng       Date:  2019-02-13

8.  STEPFORWARD study: a randomised controlled feasibility trial of a self-aligning prosthetic ankle-foot for older patients with vascular-related amputations.

Authors:  Natalie Vanicek; Elizabeth Coleman; Judith Watson; Kerry Bell; Catriona McDaid; Cleveland Barnett; Martin Twiste; Fergus Jepson; Abayomi Salawu; Dennis Harrison; Natasha Mitchell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 2.692

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.  Laboratory- and community-based health outcomes in people with transtibial amputation using crossover and energy-storing prosthetic feet: A randomized crossover trial.

Authors:  Sara J Morgan; Cody L McDonald; Elizabeth G Halsne; Sarah M Cheever; Rana Salem; Patricia A Kramer; Brian J Hafner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.