Capturing prosthetic socket fitment: Preliminary results using an ultrasound-based device

The acceptance of advanced prosthetic systems by users requires overcoming unique challenges of fitting prostheses to unique user anatomies to achieve systematic performance across a user base. Variations among individuals introduce complexities in fitting the sockets. Due to the difficulty of measuring socket interface characteristics, there is a lack of quantifiable diagnostic fitment information available. As a result, the process of fitting sockets is currently a laborintensive, manual approach, and can often result in sockets that are uncomfortable, unstable, or impede full range of motion. Additionally, results can be difficult to reproduce reliably. A diagnostic tool has been developed to quantify the relative movement between the socket and the residual bone during the fitting process. The approach leverages low cost and high precision ultrasound transceivers and intuitive visualization software to provide quantifiable socket fitment data. The goal is to enable a systematic socket-fitting strategy that yields reliable and reproducible results. Human subject testing and results are presented that show movement tracking relative to a cuff with an ultrasound transducer with an RMSD of 0.36 mm.

[1]  G. Papaioannou,et al.  Assessment of Internal and External Prosthesis Kinematics during Strenuous Activities Using Dynamic Roentgen Stereophotogrammetric Analysis , 2010 .

[2]  Walter Lee Childers,et al.  Marker-based method to measure movement between the residual limb and a transtibial prosthetic socket , 2016, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[3]  H Gholizadeh,et al.  Transtibial prosthetic socket pistoning: static evaluation of Seal-In(®) X5 and Dermo(®) Liner using motion analysis system. , 2012, Clinical biomechanics.

[4]  R. Phillips Guidance for Industry and FDA Staff Information for Manufacturers Seeking Marketing Clearance of Diagnostic Ultrasound Systems and Transducers , 2008 .

[5]  K. M. Deliparaschos,et al.  Evolution of autonomous and semi‐autonomous robotic surgical systems: a review of the literature , 2011, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[6]  P. Convery,et al.  Ultrasound study of the motion of the residual femur within a transfemoral socket during gait , 2000, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[7]  Gary M. Berke,et al.  Radiographic Comparison of Vertical Tibial Translation Using Two Types of Suspensions on a Transtibial Prosthesis: A Case Study , 2001 .

[8]  T. Nosaka,et al.  Suspension effect and dynamic evaluation of the total surface bearing (TSB) trans-tibial prosthesis: A comparison with the patellar tendon bearing (PTB) trans-tibial prosthesis , 1997, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[9]  Ayman Habib,et al.  OpenSim: Open-Source Software to Create and Analyze Dynamic Simulations of Movement , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[10]  Martin Styner,et al.  A-mode ultrasound-based registration in computer-aided surgery of the skull. , 2003, Archives of otolaryngology--head & neck surgery.

[11]  S. Grevsten,et al.  A roentgenological study of the stump-socket contact and skeletal displacement in the PTB-Suciton Prosthesis. , 1975, Upsala journal of medical sciences.

[12]  M T Madsen,et al.  A device for applying static loads to prosthetic limbs of transtibial amputees during spiral CT examination. , 2000, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[13]  Randall D Alley,et al.  Prosthetic sockets stabilized by alternating areas of tissue compression and release. , 2011, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[14]  Heinrich Kuttruff,et al.  Physik und Technik des Ultraschalls , 1988 .

[15]  M. Lilja,et al.  Movement of the tibial end in a PTB prosthesis socket: A sagittal X-ray study of the PTB prosthesis , 1993, Prosthetics and orthotics international.