Wearable Vibrotactile Biofeedback Device Allowing Identification of Different Floor Conditions for Lower-Limb Amputees.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate a newly developed biofeedback device enabling lower-limb amputees to identify various floor conditions. DESIGN Self-control with repeated measures (with and without the biofeedback device) within the amputee group, and group control comparing between amputee and nonamputee groups. SETTING University locomotion laboratory. PARTICIPANTS Five lower-limb amputees and 8 nonamputees (N=13). INTERVENTIONS A wearable biofeedback device, which identified different floor conditions by analyzing the force patterns under the prosthetic feet and provided vibration cues in response to different floor conditions, was provided to the amputees. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The subjects stepped on a foam platform concealing a small object or no object at 1 of the 4 locations of the foot sole. Subjects were asked whether there was a small object under their feet and the location of the object if it existed. The test was repeated with 4 different object types and 4 object locations. The success rate of floor identification was evaluated. RESULTS Without the biofeedback device, nonamputee subjects (76.56%) identified floor conditions better than amputees (22.5%) significantly (P<.001). On using the biofeedback device, the amputees significantly improved (P<.01) their success rate showing no significant difference (P=.746) compared with the nonamputees. No significant differences were found among object types (P=.689). CONCLUSIONS Amputees performed significantly worse than nonamputees in recognizing the different floor conditions used in this experiment. With the biofeedback device, amputees significantly improved their abilities in identifying different floor conditions. Future attempts could configure the device to allow it to provide warning signals in response to fall-inducing conditions.

[1]  W. Miller,et al.  The prevalence and risk factors of falling and fear of falling among lower extremity amputees. , 2001, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[2]  S. Bamberg,et al.  Utilization of a lower extremity ambulatory feedback system to reduce gait asymmetry in transtibial amputation gait. , 2012, Gait & posture.

[3]  Shawn J. Scott,et al.  Frontal plane dynamic margins of stability in individuals with and without transtibial amputation walking on a loose rock surface. , 2013, Gait & posture.

[4]  Ming-Yih Lee,et al.  New computer protocol with subsensory stimulation and visual/auditory biofeedback for balance assessment in amputees , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[5]  Warren S. Grundfest,et al.  Pilot testing of a haptic feedback rehabilitation system on a lower-limb amputee , 2009, 2009 ICME International Conference on Complex Medical Engineering.

[6]  J Okubo,et al.  THE ROLE OF THE PLANTAR MECHANORECEPTOR IN EQUILIBRIUM CONTROL , 1981, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[7]  K. Hagberg,et al.  Can vibratory feedback be used to improve postural stability in persons with transtibial limb loss? , 2012, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[8]  Carlo J. De Luca,et al.  The role of plantar cutaneous sensation in unperturbed stance , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[9]  Scott L Delp,et al.  Quantified self and human movement: a review on the clinical impact of wearable sensing and feedback for gait analysis and intervention. , 2014, Gait & posture.