Literature DB >> 28948848

A study to assess whether fixed-width beam walking provides sufficient challenge to assess balance ability across lower limb prosthesis users.

Andrew Sawers1, Brian J Hafner2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of fixed-width beam walking for assessing balance in lower limb prosthesis users.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional.
SETTING: Laboratory.
SUBJECTS: Lower limb prosthesis users.
METHODS: Participants attempted 10 walking trials on three fixed-width beams (18.6, 8.60, and 4.01 wide; 5.5 m long; 3.8 cm high). MAIN MEASURES: Beam-walking performance was quantified using the distance walked to balance failure. Heuristic rules applied to each participant's beam-walking distance to classify each beam as "too easy," "too hard," or "appropriately challenging" and determine whether any single beam provided an appropriate challenge to all participants. The number of trials needed to achieve stable beam-walking performance was quantified for appropriately challenging beams by identifying the last inflection point in the slope of each participant's trial-by-trial cumulative performance record.
RESULTS: In all, 30 unilateral lower limb prosthesis users participated in the study. Each of the fixed-width beams was either too easy or too hard for at least 33% of the sample. Thus, no single beam was appropriately challenging for all participants. Beam-walking performance was stable by trial 8 for all participants and by trial 6 for 90% of participants. There was no significant difference in the number of trials needed to achieve stable performance among beams ( P = 0.74).
CONCLUSION: Results suggest that a clinical beam-walking test would require multiple beams to evaluate balance across a range of lower limb prosthesis users, emphasizing the need for adaptive or progressively challenging balance tests. While the administrative burden of a multiple-beam balance test may limit clinical feasibility, alternatives to ease this administrative burden are proposed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Postural balance; amputee; falls; rehabilitation; walking

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28948848      PMCID: PMC6172946          DOI: 10.1177/0269215517732375

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Rehabil        ISSN: 0269-2155            Impact factor:   3.477


  38 in total

Review 1.  Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research.

Authors:  E M Andresen
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.966

2.  Age differences in abilities to perform tandem stand and walk tasks of graded difficulty.

Authors: 
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  1998-05-01       Impact factor: 2.840

3.  Challenging gait conditions predict 1-year decline in gait speed in older adults with apparently normal gait.

Authors:  Jennifer S Brach; Subashan Perera; Jessie M VanSwearingen; Elizabeth S Hile; David M Wert; Stephanie A Studenski
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2011-10-14

4.  Abbreviating the Finger Tapping Test.

Authors:  Lee Ashendorf; Julie E Horwitz; Brandon E Gavett
Journal:  Arch Clin Neuropsychol       Date:  2015-01-05       Impact factor: 2.813

5.  Revised normative standards of performance of men on a quantitative ataxia test battery.

Authors:  A R Fregly; M J Smith; A Graybiel
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol       Date:  1973-01       Impact factor: 1.494

6.  The Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale.

Authors:  L E Powell; A M Myers
Journal:  J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 6.053

7.  Balancing on a narrow ridge: biomechanics and control.

Authors:  E Otten
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1999-05-29       Impact factor: 6.237

8.  Adding challenge to performance-based tests of walking: The Walking InCHIANTI Toolkit (WIT).

Authors:  Stefania Bandinelli; Martina Pozzi; Fulvio Lauretani; Caroline Phillips; Anne Shumway-Cook; Jack M Guralnik; Luigi Ferrucci
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.159

9.  Validity of a functional dynamic walking test for the elderly.

Authors:  Sally D Lark; Sowjanya Pasupuleti
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.966

10.  Do static or dynamic AFOs improve balance?

Authors:  D Cattaneo; F Marazzini; A Crippa; R Cardini
Journal:  Clin Rehabil       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.477

View more
  5 in total

1.  Validation of the Narrowing Beam Walking Test in Lower Limb Prosthesis Users.

Authors:  Andrew Sawers; Brian Hafner
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2018-04-11       Impact factor: 3.966

2.  Frequency and Circumstances of Falls Reported by Ambulatory Unilateral Lower Limb Prosthesis Users: A Secondary Analysis.

Authors:  Janis Kim; Matthew J Major; Brian Hafner; Andrew Sawers
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2019-01-15       Impact factor: 2.298

3.  Narrowing beam-walking is a clinically feasible approach for assessing balance ability in lower-limb prosthesis users.

Authors:  Andrew Sawers; Brian J Hafner
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2018-05-08       Impact factor: 2.912

4.  Maximum Swing Flexion or Gait Symmetry: A Comparative Evaluation of Control Targets on Metabolic Energy Expenditure of Amputee Using Intelligent Prosthetic Knee.

Authors:  Wujing Cao; Weiliang Zhao; Hongliu Yu; Wenming Chen; Qiaoling Meng
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2018-11-21       Impact factor: 3.411

5.  A simple scoring of beam walking performance after spinal cord injury in mice.

Authors:  Shunsuke Ito; Yohei Kakuta; Kosuke Yoshida; Yuma Shirota; Tokue Mieda; Yoichi Iizuka; Hirotaka Chikuda; Haku Iizuka; Kazuhiro Nakamura
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-08-11       Impact factor: 3.752

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.