Literature DB >> 33510563

Do Upper Limb Loss and Prosthesis Use Affect Lower Limb Gait Dynamics?

Kiley Armstrong1, John T Brinkmann1, Rebecca Stine1,2, Steven A Gard1,2, Matthew J Major1,2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Intentional interruption of upper and lower limb coordination of able-bodied subjects alters their gait biomechanics. However, the effect of upper-limb loss (ULL) on lower-limb gait biomechanics is not fully understood. The aim of this secondary study was to perform a follow-up analysis of a previous dataset to characterize the spatiotemporal parameters and lower-limb kinematics and kinetics of gait for persons with ULL when wearing and not wearing an upper limb prosthesis (ULP). We were particularly interested in quantifying the effects of matching the mass and inertia of the prosthetic limb to the sound limb.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten persons with unilateral ULL walked at a self-selected speed under three randomly presented conditions: 1) not wearing a prosthesis, 2) wearing their customary prosthesis, and 3) wearing a mock prosthesis that can be adjusted to match the length, mass, and inertial properties of each subject's sound limb. Walkway-embedded force plates and a 12-camera digital motion capture system recorded ground reaction forces (GRFs) and retroreflective marker position data, respectively. Average spatiotemporal (walking speed, cadence, stance time, swing time, step length, double support time), lower-limb kinematic (joint angles), and lower-limb kinetic (ground forces, joint moments and powers) data were processed and their statistical significance were analyzed. RESULT: Walking speed for each condition was nearly equivalent (1.20±0.01 m/s) and differences between condition were non-significant (p=0.769). The interaction effect (side× prosthesis) was significant for peak hip extension (p=0.01) and second peak (propulsive) vertical GRF (p=0.028), but separate follow-up analyses of both main effects were not significant (p≥0.099). All other main effect comparisons were not significant (p≥0.102).
CONCLUSIONS: Although the sample cohort was small and heterogeneous, the results of this study suggest that persons with unilateral ULL did not display significant limb side asymmetry in lower-limb gait spatiotemporal, kinetic, and kinematic parameters, regardless of ULP use.

Entities:  

Keywords:  amputation; arm; biomechanics; gait; kinematics; kinetics; prosthesis; spatiotemporal; upper limb

Year:  2019        PMID: 33510563      PMCID: PMC7839067          DOI: 10.1097/JPO.0000000000000333

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Prosthet Orthot        ISSN: 1040-8800


  24 in total

1.  Resonant frequencies of arms and legs identify different walking patterns.

Authors:  R C Wagenaar; R E van Emmerik
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 2.712

2.  Neural regulation of rhythmic arm and leg movement is conserved across human locomotor tasks.

Authors:  E Paul Zehr; Jaclyn E Balter; Daniel P Ferris; Sandra R Hundza; Pamela M Loadman; Rebecca H Stoloff
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2007-04-26       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Control and function of arm swing in human walking and running.

Authors:  Herman Pontzer; John H Holloway; John H Holloway; David A Raichlen; Daniel E Lieberman
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 3.312

4.  Walking symmetry and energy cost in persons with unilateral transtibial amputations: matching prosthetic and intact limb inertial properties.

Authors:  S J Mattes; P E Martin; T D Royer
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  Arm constraint and walking in healthy adults.

Authors:  Matthew P Ford; Robert C Wagenaar; Karl M Newell
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2006-09-25       Impact factor: 2.840

6.  Effects of Upper Limb Loss or Absence and Prosthesis Use on Postural Control of Standing Balance.

Authors:  Matthew J Major; Rebecca Stine; Tara Shirvaikar; Steven A Gard
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 2.159

7.  Shaping appropriate locomotive motor output through interlimb neural pathway within spinal cord in humans.

Authors:  Noritaka Kawashima; Daichi Nozaki; Masaki O Abe; Kimitaka Nakazawa
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-04-30       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Pendular activity of human upper limbs during slow and normal walking.

Authors:  D Webb; R H Tuttle; M Baksh
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 2.868

9.  Dynamic arm swinging in human walking.

Authors:  Steven H Collins; Peter G Adamczyk; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-07-29       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  The effect of restricted arm swing on energy expenditure in healthy men.

Authors:  Ziva Yizhar; Spiro Boulos; Omri Inbar; Eli Carmeli
Journal:  Int J Rehabil Res       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 1.479

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.