The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0347-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
There are many studies that have investigated biomechanical differences among prosthetic feet, but not changes due to adaptation over time. There is a need for objective measures to quantify the process of adaptation for individuals with a transtibial amputation. Mechanical power and work profiles are a primary focus for modern energy-storage-and-return type prostheses, which strive to increase energy return from the prosthesis. The amount of energy a prosthesis stores and returns (i.e., negative and positive work) during stance is directly influenced by the user’s loading strategy, which may be sensitive to alterations during the course of an adaptation period. The purpose of this study was to examine changes in lower limb mechanical work profiles during walking following a three-week adaptation to a new prosthesis.
A retrospective analysis was performed on 22 individuals with a unilateral transtibial amputation. Individuals were given a new prosthesis at their current mobility level (K3 or above) and wore it for three weeks. Kinematic and kinetic measures were recorded from overground walking at 0, 1.5, and 3 weeks into the adaptation period at a self-selected pace. Positive and negative work done by the prosthesis and sound ankle-foot were calculated using a unified deformable segment model and a six-degrees-of-freedom model for the knee and hip.
Positive work from the prosthesis ankle-foot increased by 6.1% and sound ankle-foot by 5.7% after 3 weeks (p = 0.041, 0.036). No significant changes were seen in negative work from prosthesis or sound ankle-foot (p = 0.115, 0.192). There was also a 4.1% increase in self-selected walking speed after 3 weeks (p = 0.038). Our data exhibited large inter-subject variations, in which some individuals followed group trends in work profiles while others had opposite trends in outcome variables.
After a 3-week adaptation, 14 out of 22 individuals with a transtibial amputation increased energy return from the prosthesis. Such findings could indicate that individuals may better utilize the spring-like function of the prosthesis after an adaptation period.
Additional file 1: Ankle-foot work ratio (positive/negative work), stride length, and stance time were examined during the 3 week adaptation period. One factor repeated measures ANOVA was used to examine the effects of visits on the outcome variables. *denotes statistical significance (p < 0.05). (PDF 201 kb)12984_2018_347_MOESM1_ESM.pdf
Torburn L, Powers CM, Guiterrez R, Perry J. Energy expenditure during ambulation in dysvascular and traumatic below-knee amputees: a comparison of five prosthetic feet. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1995;32:111–9. PubMed
Hafner BJ, Sanders JE, Czerniecki J, Fergason J. Energy storage and return prostheses: does patient perception correlate with biomechanical analysis? Clin Biomech. 2002;17:325–44. CrossRef
Perry J, Shanfield S. Efficiency of dynamic elastic response prosthetic feet. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1993;30:137–43. PubMed
CP MG, Neptune RR, Kram R. Independent effects of weight and mass on plantar flexor activity during walking: implications for their contributions to body support and forward propulsion. J Appl Physiol. 2008;105:486–94. CrossRef
Powers CM, Torburn L, Perry J, Ayyappa E. Influence of prosthetic foot design on sound limb loading in adults with unilateral below-knee amputations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75:825–9. PubMed
Major MJ, Twiste M, Kenney LPJ, Howard D. The effects of prosthetic ankle stiffness on ankle and knee kinematics, prosthetic limb loading, and net metabolic cost of trans-tibial amputee gait. Clin. Biomech. Bristol Avon. 2014;29:98–104. CrossRef
Wurdeman SR, Myers SA, Jacobsen AL, Stergiou N. Adaptation and prosthesis effects of stride-to-stride fluctuations in amputee gait. PLoS One. 2014;9:e100125.
Hafner BJ, Sanders JE, Czerniecki JM, Fergason J. Transtibial energy-storage-and-return prosthetic devices: a review of energy concepts and a proposed nomenclature. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2002;39:1–11. PubMed
Collins SH, Kuo AD. Recycling energy to restore impaired ankle function during human walking. PLoS ONE. 2010;5.2:e9307.
Mancinelli C, Patritti BL, Tropea P, Greenwald RM, Casler R, Herr H, et al. Comparing a passive-elastic and a powered prosthesis in transtibial amputees. Conf Proc Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc Annu Conf. 2011;2011:8255–8.
Fey NP, Klute GK, Neptune RR. The influence of energy storage and return foot stiffness on walking mechanics and muscle activity in below-knee amputees. Clin. Biomech. Bristol Avon. 2011;26:1025–32. CrossRef
Agrawal V, Gailey R, O’Toole C, Gaunaurd I, Finnieston A. Influence of gait training and prosthetic foot category on external work symmetry during unilateral transtibial amputee gait. Prosthetics Orthot Int. 2013;37:396–403. CrossRef
Winter DA. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. Biomech Mot Control Hum Mov. 3rd ed.
Takahashi KZ, Horne JR, Stanhope SJ. Comparison of mechanical energy profiles of passive and active below-knee prostheses: a case study. Prosthetics Orthot Int. 2015;39:150–6. CrossRef
Franz JR, Maletis M, Kram R. Real-time feedback enhances forward propulsion during walking in old adults. Clin Biomech Bristol Avon. 2014;29:68–74. CrossRef
Youdas JW, Childs KB, McNeil ML, Mueller AC, Quilter CM, Hollman JH. Responsiveness of 2 procedures for measurement of temporal and spatial gait parameters in older adults. PM&R. 2010;2:537–43. CrossRef
English RD, Hubbard WA, GK ME. Establishment of consistent gait after fitting of new components. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1995;32:32–5. PubMed
- Prosthetic energy return during walking increases after 3 weeks of adaptation to a new device
Samuel F. Ray
Shane R. Wurdeman
Kota Z. Takahashi
- BioMed Central