Transtibial amputee gait efficiency: Energy storage and return versus solid ankle cushioned heel prosthetic feet.

Energy storage and return (ESR) feet have long been assumed to promote metabolically efficient amputee gait. However, despite being prescribed for approximately 30 yr, there is limited evidence that they achieve this desired function. Here, we report a meta-analysis of data from 10 studies that met our selection criteria to determine whether amputee walking with ESR feet is more efficient than with conventional solid ankle cushioned heel (SACH) feet. Additionally, the data were tested for a relationship with walking speed since it has been suggested ESR feet might perform better at higher speeds. The raw data are highly variable because of differences in study protocols; therefore, we normalized the data and found a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) between ESR and SACH feet. However, the magnitude of this difference is small, with the cost of transport (COT) with ESR feet being 97.3% of the cost with SACH feet. No relationship between ESR COT and speed was found (p = 0.19). We hypothesize that the small but statistically significant difference between ESR and SACH feet may not constitute a functionally significant improvement in COT, possibly related to the limited push-off power provided by ESR feed compared with nondisabled ankles.

[1]  Alan R De Asha,et al.  Impact on the biomechanics of overground gait of using an 'Echelon' hydraulic ankle-foot device in unilateral trans-tibial and trans-femoral amputees. , 2014, Clinical biomechanics.

[2]  A. E. Ferris,et al.  Evaluation of a powered ankle-foot prosthetic system during walking. , 2012, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[3]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg and Mauch SNS prosthetic knees. , 2006, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[4]  Karl E Zelik,et al.  The role of series ankle elasticity in bipedal walking. , 2014, Journal of theoretical biology.

[5]  R. Waters,et al.  Energy cost of walking of amputees: the influence of level of amputation. , 1976, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  D. Shurr,et al.  Comparison of Energy Cost and Gait Efficiency During Ambulation in Below-Knee Amputees Using Different Prosthetic Feet—A Preliminary Report , 1988 .

[7]  Dirk Lefeber,et al.  Prosthetic feet: State-of-the-art review and the importance of mimicking human ankle–foot biomechanics , 2009, Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology.

[8]  J. Lehmann,et al.  Comprehensive analysis of energy storing prosthetic feet: Flex Foot and Seattle Foot Versus Standard SACH foot. , 1993, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  T. Fukunaga,et al.  Muscle and Tendon Interaction During Human Movements , 2002, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[10]  D. Shurr,et al.  The effects of prosthetic foot design on physiologic measurements, self-selected walking velocity, and physical activity in people with transtibial amputation. , 2006, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[11]  M J Highsmith,et al.  Energy Costs & Performance of Transtibial Amputees & Non-amputees during Walking & Running , 2014, International Journal of Sports Medicine.

[12]  J. Perry,et al.  Energy expenditure during ambulation in dysvascular and traumatic below-knee amputees: a comparison of five prosthetic feet. , 1995, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[13]  H. Hermens,et al.  Energy storage and release of prosthetic feet Part 1: Biomechanical analysis related to user benefits , 1997, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[14]  A Hreljac,et al.  Preferred and energetically optimal gait transition speeds in human locomotion. , 1993, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[15]  O. Horgan,et al.  Psychosocial adjustment to lower-limb amputation: A review , 2004, Disability and rehabilitation.

[16]  P. Willems,et al.  Effect of speed on the energy cost of walking in unilateral traumatic lower limb amputees , 2008, European Journal of Applied Physiology.

[17]  J. Lehmann,et al.  Comprehensive analysis of dynamic elastic response feet: Seattle Ankle/Lite Foot versus SACH foot. , 1993, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[18]  J. Eidt,et al.  Major lower extremity amputations at a Veterans Affairs hospital. , 2003, American journal of surgery.

[19]  K. Postema,et al.  Prescription of prosthetic ankle-foot mechanisms after lower limb amputation. , 2004, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[20]  H J Yack,et al.  Physiological measurements of walking and running in people with transtibial amputations with 3 different prostheses. , 1999, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[21]  Alena M. Grabowski,et al.  Bionic ankle–foot prosthesis normalizes walking gait for persons with leg amputation , 2012, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[22]  P. Komi,et al.  Muscle-tendon interaction and elastic energy usage in human walking. , 2005, Journal of applied physiology.

[23]  Daphne Wezenberg,et al.  Relation between aerobic capacity and walking ability in older adults with a lower-limb amputation. , 2013, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[24]  D. Barth,et al.  Gait Analysis and Energy Cost of Below‐Knee Amputees Wearing Six Different Prosthetic Feet , 1992 .

[25]  T. Schmalz,et al.  Energy expenditure and biomechanical characteristics of lower limb amputee gait: the influence of prosthetic alignment and different prosthetic components. , 2002, Gait & posture.

[26]  T. Fukunaga,et al.  In vivo behaviour of human muscle tendon during walking , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[27]  J. Didier,et al.  Bioenergetic comparison of a new energy-storing foot and SACH foot in traumatic below-knee vascular amputations. , 1995, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.