The effect of prosthetic ankle mobility in the sagittal plane on the gait of transfemoral amputees wearing a stance phase controlled knee prosthesis

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part H: Journal of Engineering in Medicine

Volumn 223, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 263-271

  Lee, S ^a   Hong, J ^a  

^a Korea University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Gait characteristics in early stance phase; Sagittal mobility of foot ankle; Stance and swing phase controlled knee prosthesis; Stance phase control; Transfemoral amputee

Indexed keywords

GAIT CHARACTERISTICS IN EARLY STANCE PHASE; SAGITTAL MOBILITY OF FOOT-ANKLE; STANCE AND SWING PHASE CONTROLLED KNEE PROSTHESIS; STANCE PHASE CONTROL; TRANSFEMORAL AMPUTEE;

ARTIFICIAL LIMBS; IMPLANTS (SURGICAL); PHASE CONTROL;

JOINT PROSTHESES;

ADULT; AMPUTATION STUMP; ANKLE; ARTICLE; DISABLED PERSON; FEMALE; GAIT; HUMAN; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; KNEE; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; TASK PERFORMANCE; WALKING;

ADULT; AMPUTATION STUMPS; AMPUTEES; ANKLE JOINT; FEMALE; GAIT; HUMANS; KNEE JOINT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; WALKING;

EID: 63849230517     PISSN: 09544119     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1243/09544119JEIM327     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Stokosa, J. The prosthetic Rx is outdated. In Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Pacific Rim Conference on Prosthetics and orthotics, Maui, Hawaii, USA, 20-24 January 2004 (INTERBOR, International Association of Orthotists and Prosthetists, Kontich, Belgium).
2. Zahedi, S. The results of the field trial of the Endolite Intelligent Prosthesis. In Proceedings of the XII International Congress of INTERBOR, Lisbon, Portugal, 22-25 September 1993 (U.S. National Member Society of the International Society for Prosthetics and Orthodontics, Dublin, Ohio).
3. Datta, D. and Howitt, J. Conventional versus microchip controlled pneumatic swing phase control for trans-femoral amputees: user's verdict. Prosthetics Orthotics Int., 1998, 22, 129-135.
4. Taylor, M. B., Clark, E., Offord, E. A., and Baxter, C. A comparison of energy expenditure by a high level trans-femoral amputee using the intelligent prosthesis and conventionally damped prosthetic limbs. Prosthetics Orthotics Int., 1996, 20, 116-121.
5. Buckley, J. G., Spence, W. D., and Solomonidis, S. E. Energy cost of walking: comparison of 'intelligent prosthesis' with conventional mechanism. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., 1997, 78, 330-333.
6. Chin, T., Sawamura, S., Shiba, R., Oyabu, H., Nagakura, Y., Takase, I., Machida, K., and Nakagawa, A. Effect of an intelligent prosthesis (IP) on the walking ability of young transfemoral amputees: comparison of IP users with able-bodied people. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil., 2003, 82, 447-451.
7. Datta, D., Heller, B., and Howitt, J. A comparative evaluation of oxygen consumption and gait pattern in amputees using intelligent prostheses and conventionally damped knee swing-phase control. Clin. Rehabil., 2005, 19, 398-403.
8. Chin, T., Sawamura, S., Shiba, R., Oyabu, H., Nagakura, Y., and Nakagawa, A. Energy expenditure during walking in amputees after disarticulation of the hip. A microprocessor-controlled swing-phase control knee versus a mechanical-controlled stance-phase control knee. J. Bone Jt Surg. Br., 2005, 87, 117-119.
9. Saunders, J. B. M., Inman, V. T., and Eberhaardt, H. D.The major determinants in normal and pathological gait. J. Bone JtSurg. Am., 1953, 35, 543-558.
10. Mauch, H. A. Stance control for above-knee artificial legs-design considerations in the S-N-S knee. Bull. Prosthetics Res., 1968, 10, 61-72.
11. Blumentritt, S., Scherer, H. W., Wellershaus, U., and Michael, J. W. Design principles, biomechanical data and clinical experience with a polycentric knee offering controlled stance phase knee flexion: a preliminary report. J. Prosthetics Orthotics, 1997, 18-24.
12. Blumentritt, S., Scherer, H. W., Michael, J. W., and Schmalz, T. Transfemoral amputees walking on a rotary hydraulic prosthetic knee mechanism: a preliminary report. J. Prosthetics Orthotics, 1998, 10, 61-78.
13. Schmalz, T., Blumentritt, S., and Jarasch, R. Energy expenditure and biomechanical characteristics of lower limb amputee gait: the influence of prosthetic alignment and different prosthetic components. Gait Posture, 2002, 16, 255-63.
14. Chin, T., Machida, K., Sawamura, S., Shiba, R., Oyabu, H., Nagakura, Y., Takase, I., and Naka- gawa, A. Comparison of different microprocessor controlled knee joints on the energy consumption during walking in trans-femoral amputees: intelligent knee prosthesis (IP) versus C-Leg. Prosthetics Orthotics Int., 2006, 3, 73-80.
15. Orendurff, M. S., Segal, A. D., Klute, G. K., McDowell, M. L., Pecoraro, J. A., and Czerniecki, J. M. Gait efficiency using the C-Leg. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev., 2006, 43, 239-46.
16. Seymour, R., Engbretson, B., Kott, K., Ordway, N., Brooks, G., Crannell, J., Hickernell, E., and Wheeler, K. Comparison between the C-Leg microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee and non-microprocessor control prosthetic knees: a preliminary study of energy expenditure, obstacle course performance, and quality of life survey. Prosthetics Orthotics Int., 2007, 31, 51-61.
17. Perry, J., Burnfield, J. M., Newsam, C. J., and Conley, P. Energy expenditure and gait characteristics of a bilateral amputee walking with C-Leg prostheses compared with stubby and conventional articulating prostheses. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil., 2004, 85, 1711-1717.
18. Johansson, J. L., Sherrill, D. M., Riley, P. O., Bonato, P., and Herr, H. A clinical comparison of variable-damping and mechanically passive prosthetic knee devices. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil., 2005, 84, 563-575.
19. Segal, A. D., Orendurff, M. S., Klute, G. K., McDowell, M. L., Pecoraro, J. A., Shofer, J., and Czerniecki, J. M. Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg and Mauch SNS prosthetic knees. J. Rehabil. Res. Dev., 2006, 43, 857-870.
20. Kaufman, K. R., Levine, J. A., Brey, R. H., Iverson, B. K., McCrady, S. K., Padgett, D. J., and Joyner, M. J. Gait and balance of transfemoral amputees using passive mechanical and microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees. Gait Posture, 2007, 26, 489-493.
21. Bowker, J. H. and Michael, J. W. Atlas of limb prosthesis: surgical, prosthetics, and rehabilitation principles, 1992 (American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Mosby Year Book Inc., St Louis, Missouri).
22. O'Connor, C. M., Thorpe, S. K., O'Malley, M. J., and Vaughan, C. L. Automatic detection of gait events using kinematic data. Gait Posture, 2007, 25, 469-474.
23. Whittle, M. W. Gait analysis: an introduction, 2002 (Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford).
24. Steidel, R. F. An introduction to mechanical vibrations, 2nd edition, 1979 (John Wiley, New York).
25. Winter, D. A., Eng, J. J., and Ishac, M. G. A review of kinetic parameters in human walking. In The book of the gait analysis: theory and application (Eds R. L. Craik and C. A. Oatis), 1995, pp. 252-270 (Mosby-Year Book, Inc., St Louis, Missouri).
26. Pandy, M. G. and Berme, N. A general recursive technique for formulating mathematical models of human gait: theory and application. In The book of biomechanics of human movement: applications in rehabilitation, sports and ergonomics (Eds N. Berme and A. Cappozzo), 1990, pp. 324-333 (Bertec Corporation, Worthington, Ohio).