Effect on gait and socket comfort in unilateral trans-tibial amputees after exchange to a polyurethane concept

Trans-tibial amputees with different indications for amputation often have stump problems. Many active amputees have limits in daily life and sports activities because of pressure ulcers, friction, allergic dermatitis or volume changes. Many methods and materials have been tried to make a well-fitted socket. A new polyurethane concept had been designed with a shock absorbing effect. The purpose of this prospective study was to compare a conventional suspension with a polyurethane concept with regard to the amputees' satisfaction, socket comfort, physical capacity and to analyse the long-term effect. The total material includes 29 unilateral transtibial amputees. They answered a questionnaire after 2 months use of the polyurethane concept and were interviewed after 3 and 5 years. After 3 years 22 amputees and after 5 years 20 amputees used the polyurethane concept. Gait was registered in 7 amputees. Speed and symmetry index (SI) for temporal, stride and kinematics variables were used to evaluate gait. The amputees reported that the polyurethane concept was better or much better in physical capacity in 117 (67%) and socket comfort was better or much better in 119 (82%) compared with the conventional suspension. There was no obvious symmetry difference in gait variables in speed, step length, step time or single support or in kinematics knee variables. The amputees tended to walk faster, decrease in symmetry in temporal and stride variables and increase in symmetry in kinematics variables with the polyurethane concept. After 5 years 6 had died and 20 amputees of the surviving 23 used the polyurethane concept. Conclusions: The polyurethane concept increased comfort considerably and physical activity increased when the trans-tibial amputees changed from conventional suspension. Gait registration was not useful to evaluate the amputees' satisfaction or socket comfort.

[1]  J. Dingwell,et al.  Use of an instrumented treadmill for real-time gait symmetry evaluation and feedback in normal and trans-tibial amputee subjects , 1996, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[2]  E. Zimerson,et al.  Skin disorders in amputees. , 2000, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[3]  D. Winter,et al.  Gait in the elderly , 1997 .

[4]  Y L Chou,et al.  Gait analysis and energy consumption of below-knee amputees wearing three different prosthetic feet. , 2000, Gait & posture.

[5]  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.

[6]  J. Perry,et al.  The effect of five prosthetic feet on the gait and loading of the sound limb in dysvascular below-knee amputees. , 1995, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[7]  G. Street,et al.  A comparison of trans-tibial amputee suction and vacuum socket conditions , 2001, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[8]  B. Nigg,et al.  Use of force platform variables to quantify the effects of chiropractic manipulation on gait symmetry. , 1987, Journal of manipulative and physiological therapeutics.

[9]  C Marincek,et al.  Double-limb support and step-length asymmetry in below-knee amputees. , 1997, Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[10]  J. S. Rietman,et al.  Gait analysis in prosthetics: Opinions, ideas and conclusions , 2002, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[11]  W. Eisma,et al.  Walking speed of normal subjects and amputees: Aspects of validity of gait analysis , 1993, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[12]  P Sewell,et al.  Developments in the transtibial prosthetic socket fitting process: A review of past and present research , 2000, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[13]  H. Ogata,et al.  Total surface bearing below-knee prosthesis: advantages, disadvantages, and clinical implications. , 1998, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[14]  H. Hermens,et al.  Energy storage and release of prosthetic feet Part 2: Subjective ratings of 2 energy storing and 2 conventional feet, user choice of foot and deciding factor , 1997, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[15]  G K Klute,et al.  Mechanical properties of prosthetic limbs: adapting to the patient. , 2001, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[16]  J Cluitmans,et al.  Experiences with respect to the ICEROSS system for trans-tibial prostheses , 1994, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[17]  H B Skinner,et al.  The relationship between gait parameters and pain in persons with transtibial amputation: a preliminary report. , 1998, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[18]  Joseph M. Czerniecki Gait analysis in the amputee: Has it helped the amputee or contributed to the development of improved prosthetic components? , 1995 .

[19]  M. Zhang,et al.  Comparison of computational analysis with clinical measurement of stresses on below-knee residual limb in a prosthetic socket. , 2000, Medical engineering & physics.

[20]  J. Sanders,et al.  Clinical study: Changes in interface pressure and stump shape over time: Preliminary results from a transtibial amputee subject , 2000, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[21]  M. Legro,et al.  Issues of importance reported by persons with lower limb amputations and prostheses. , 1999, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

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

[23]  Levy Sw Amputees: skin problems and prostheses. , 1995 .

[24]  B M Persson,et al.  A clinical standard of stump measurement and classification in lower limb amputees , 1983, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[25]  E. Isakov,et al.  Influence of speed on gait parameters and on symmetry in transtibial amputees , 1996, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[26]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  Chronic phantom sensations, phantom pain, residual limb pain, and other regional pain after lower limb amputation. , 2000, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[27]  S W Levy Amputees: skin problems and prostheses. , 1995, Cutis.

[28]  B J McFadyen,et al.  Running gait impulse asymmetries in below-knee amputees , 1992, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[29]  J. D. Morrison,et al.  Polyurethane gel liner usage in the Oxford Prosthetic Service , 2001, Prosthetics and orthotics international.