Literature DB >> 8239969

Comprehensive analysis of energy storing prosthetic feet: Flex Foot and Seattle Foot Versus Standard SACH foot.

J F Lehmann1, R Price, S Boswell-Bessette, A Dralle, K Questad, B J deLateur.   

Abstract

This study compared the mechanical and biomechanical functions, metabolic demand, and shock absorption of two dynamic elastic response (DER) prosthetic foot designs with the SACH foot. Nine individuals who had undergone unilateral below knee amputation were studied. Mechanical properties of the feet were related to gait biomechanics. Forefoot compliance is greatest for the Flex Foot and least for the SACH foot, hence, Flex Foot demonstrates (1) the longest midstance phase, (2) the greatest ankle angle range, and (3) greater forward movement of the center of pressure. There was some evidence that the DER feet produced a better push-off. However, neither the self-selected walking speed nor the metabolic rate or efficiency over a spectrum of walking speeds (73 to 120m/min) and running speeds (140 to 200m/min) was significantly different. Because no energy savings resulted for the DER feet, the release of stored energy in the flexible feet may not occur at the proper time to assist in ambulation as a result of the natural frequency of oscillation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1993        PMID: 8239969

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0003-9993            Impact factor:   3.966


  16 in total

1.  Biomechanical evaluation of a prototype foot/ankle prosthesis.

Authors:  P M Quesada; M Pitkin; J Colvin
Journal:  IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng       Date:  2000-03

Review 2.  Science, medicine, and the future: Artificial limbs.

Authors:  L J Marks; J W Michael
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-09-29

3.  A comparison of two prosthetic feet on the multi-joint and multi-plane kinetic gait compensations in individuals with a unilateral trans-tibial amputation.

Authors:  Heather A Underwood; Craig D Tokuno; Janice J Eng
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.063

4.  Comparison of Rectified and Unrectified Sockets for Transtibial Amputees.

Authors:  Jack R Engsberg; S Wayne Sprouse; Mary L Uhrich; Barbara R Ziegler; F Daniel Luitjohan
Journal:  J Prosthet Orthot       Date:  2008

5.  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

6.  Impact testing of the residual limb: System response to changes in prosthetic stiffness.

Authors:  Erin Boutwell; Rebecca Stine; Steven Gard
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2016

7.  Systematic variation of prosthetic foot spring affects center-of-mass mechanics and metabolic cost during walking.

Authors:  Karl E Zelik; Steven H Collins; Peter G Adamczyk; Ava D Segal; Glenn K Klute; David C Morgenroth; Michael E Hahn; Michael S Orendurff; Joseph M Czerniecki; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2011-06-23       Impact factor: 3.802

8.  Concept Through Preliminary Bench Testing of a Powered Lower Limb Prosthetic Device.

Authors:  Bryan J Bergelin; Javier O Mattos; Joseph G Wells; Philip A Voglewede
Journal:  J Mech Robot       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.085

9.  Recycling energy to restore impaired ankle function during human walking.

Authors:  Steven H Collins; Arthur D Kuo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.