A systematic literature review of the effect of different prosthetic components on human functioning with a lower-limb prosthesis.

A correct prosthetic prescription can be derived from adapting the functional benefits of a prosthesis to the functional needs of the prosthetic user. For adequate matching, the functional abilities of the amputees are of value, as well as the technical and functional aspects of the various prosthetic components. No clear clinical consensus seems to be given on the precise prescription criteria. To obtain information about different prosthetic components and daily functioning of amputees with a prosthesis, we performed a systematic literature search. The quality of the studies was assessed with the use of predetermined methodological criteria. Out of 356 potentially relevant studies, 40 studies eventually qualified for final methodological analysis and review. Four satisfied all the criteria and were classified as A-level studies, 26 as B-level, and 10 studies as C-level studies. Despite a huge amount of literature, our formal clinical knowledge had considerable gaps concerning the effects of different prosthetic components and their mechanical characteristics on human functioning with a lower-limb prosthesis. Therefore, with regard to prosthetic guideline development, we must still largely rely on clinical consensus among experts. The integration of knowledge from research with the expert opinion of clinical professionals and the opinions and wishes of consumers can form a solid base for a procedure on guideline development for prosthetic prescription.

[2]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  EFFECT OF ALTERATIONS IN PROSTHETIC SHANK MASS ON THE METABOLIC COSTS OF AMBULATION IN ABOVE-KNEE AMPUTEES , 1994, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[3]  E. Ayyappa,et al.  Influence of prosthetic foot design on sound limb loading in adults with unilateral below-knee amputations. , 1994, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

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

[5]  P J Corcoran,et al.  Energy expenditure of ambulation in patients with above-knee amputations. , 1975, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[6]  W C Flowers,et al.  Stance phase control of above-knee prostheses: knee control versus SACH foot design. , 1987, Journal of biomechanics.

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

[8]  Donald G. Shurr,et al.  Gait Comparisons for Below-Knee Amputees Using a Flex-Foot™ Versus a Conventional Prosthetic Foot , 1991 .

[9]  R B Stein,et al.  IMPROVED ANKLE‐FOOT SYSTEM FOR ABOVE‐KNEE AMPUTEES , 1986, American journal of physical medicine.

[10]  A L Hof,et al.  Comparison of gait using a Multiflex foot versus a Quantum foot in knee disarticulation amputees , 1993, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[11]  C M Godfrey,et al.  Foot mass effect on gait in the prosthetic limb. , 1977, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[12]  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.

[13]  P. E. Martin,et al.  Walking symmetry and energy cost in persons with unilateral transtibial amputations: matching prosthetic and intact limb inertial properties. , 2000, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[14]  D A Winter,et al.  Mechanical efficiency during gait of adults with transtibial amputation: a pilot study comparing the SACH, Seattle, and Golden-Ankle prosthetic feet. , 1998, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[15]  A. E. Chapman,et al.  Prostheses alignment: effect on gait of persons with below-knee amputations. , 1984, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[16]  S A Hale,et al.  Analysis of the swing phase dynamics and muscular effort of the above-knee amputee for varying prosthetic shank loads , 1990, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[17]  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.

[19]  A K Dasgupta,et al.  The performance of the ICEROSS prostheses amongst transtibial amputees with a special reference to the workplace--a preliminary study. Icelandic Roll on Silicone Socket. , 1997, Occupational medicine.

[20]  S J Sheredos,et al.  Report on the evaluation of the VA/Seattle below-knee prosthesis. , 1993, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[21]  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.

[22]  J B Bussmann,et al.  Effects of prosthetic mass and mass distribution on kinematics and energetics of prosthetic gait: a systematic review. , 1999, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[23]  D J Sanderson,et al.  Comparative biomechanical analysis of energy-storing prosthetic feet. , 1992, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[24]  P. Kohler,et al.  Comparison of CAD-CAM and hand made sockets for PTB prostheses , 1989, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[25]  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.

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

[27]  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.

[28]  J. Grimshaw,et al.  Potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines , 1999, BMJ.

[29]  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.

[30]  D Datta,et al.  A pilot study comparing the cognitive demand of walking for transfemoral amputees using the Intelligent Prosthesis with that using conventionally damped knees , 2000, Clinical rehabilitation.

[31]  C H Daly,et al.  Interface pressures and shear stresses: Sagittal plane angular alignment effects in three trans-tibial amputee case studies , 1999, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[32]  J Perry,et al.  Below-knee amputee gait with dynamic elastic response prosthetic feet: a pilot study. , 1990, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

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

[34]  I. Olkin,et al.  Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement , 1999, The Lancet.

[35]  Z Susak,et al.  Energy expenditure and cardiac response in above-knee amputees while using prostheses with open and locked knee mechanisms. , 1985, Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine. Supplement.

[36]  M. Nash,et al.  Energy expenditure of trans-tibial amputees during ambulation at self-selected pace , 1994, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[37]  S. E. Solomonidis,et al.  Biomechanical evaluation of SACH and uniaxial feet , 1984, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[38]  A L Hof,et al.  Gait analysis of transfemoral amputee patients using prostheses with two different knee joints. , 1996, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[39]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  BIOMECHANICAL ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCE OF PROSTHETIC FEET ON BELOW-KNEE AMPUTEE WALKING , 1991, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[40]  Suction socket suspension for below-knee amputees. , 1986, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[41]  M. Nash,et al.  The CAT-CAM socket and quadrilateral socket: A comparison of energy cost during ambulation , 1993, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[42]  A Gitter,et al.  INSIGHTS INTO AMPUTEE RUNNING: A Muscle Work Analysis , 1992, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[43]  M. Nash,et al.  The effects of prosthesis mass on metabolic cost of ambulation in non-vascular trans-tibial amputees , 1997, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[44]  C. W. Radcliffe,et al.  The University of California Biomechanics Laboratory four-bar polycentric knee linkage. A clinical trial in 20 active above-knee amputees. , 1986, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[45]  V. C. Roberts,et al.  The effect of footwear mass on the gait patterns of unilateral below-knee amputees , 1989, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[46]  W D Spence,et al.  Energy cost of walking: comparison of "intelligent prosthesis" with conventional mechanism. , 1997, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[47]  T. Mulder,et al.  Clinical gait analysis in a rehabilitation context: some controversial issues , 1998, Clinical rehabilitation.

[48]  T. Schmalz,et al.  [Significance of static prosthesis alignment for standing and walking of patients with lower limb amputation]. , 2001, Der Orthopade.

[49]  S G Zachariah,et al.  Effects of changes in cadence, prosthetic componentry, and time on interface pressures and shear stresses of three trans-tibial amputees. , 2000, Clinical biomechanics.

[50]  R W Wirta,et al.  Analysis of below-knee suspension systems: effect on gait. , 1990, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[51]  E. Culham,et al.  Below-Knee Amputation: A Comparison of the Effect of the Sach Foot and Single Axis Foot on Electromyographic Patterns During Locomotion , 1986, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[52]  Donald G. Shurr,et al.  Perception of Walking Difficulty by Below-Knee Amputees Using a Conventional Foot Versus the Flex-Foot , 1991 .

[53]  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.

[54]  A. Lees,et al.  A biomechanical comparison of the SACH, Seattle and Jaipur feet using ground reaction forces , 1995, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[55]  Steven Piantadosi,et al.  Clinical Trials As Experimental Designs , 2005 .

[56]  Morrison Jb,et al.  Prostheses alignment: effect on gait of persons with below-knee amputations. , 1984 .

[57]  T Kasahara,et al.  Functional evaluation by gait analysis of various ankle-foot assemblies used by below-knee amputees , 1992, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[58]  L. E. Holt,et al.  A comparison of the SACH and single axis foot in the gait of unilateral below-knee amputees , 1983, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[59]  Energy costs of below-knee prostheses using two types of suspension. , 1979, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[60]  A. Karsznia,et al.  Clinical evaluation of trans-tibial prosthesis sockets: A comparison between CAD CAM and conventionally produced sockets , 1993, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[61]  G. Cochran A primer of orthopaedic biomechanics , 1982 .

[62]  W. A. Hubbard,et al.  Establishment of consistent gait after fitting of new components. , 1995, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[63]  E L Bontrager,et al.  Segment velocities in normal and transtibial amputees: prosthetic design implications. , 1998, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[64]  J. Lehmann,et al.  Mass and mass distribution of below-knee prostheses: effect on gait efficacy and self-selected walking speed. , 1998, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[65]  H. Vet,et al.  The Delphi list: a criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[66]  J. van Limbeek,et al.  An open socket technique for through-knee amputations in relation to skin problems of the stump: an explorative study , 1999, Clinical rehabilitation.

[67]  Murray Mp,et al.  Gait patterns in above-knee amputee patients: hydraulic swing control vs constant-friction knee components. , 1983 .

[68]  Hannu Alaranta,et al.  Practical Benefits of Flex-Foot in Below-Knee Amputees , 1991 .

[69]  J. B. J. Bussmann,et al.  Measuring daily behavior using ambulatory accelerometry: The Activity Monitor , 2001, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[70]  H. Alaranta,et al.  Subjective benefits of energy storing prostheses , 1994, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[71]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  Energy transfer mechanisms as a compensatory strategy in below knee amputee runners. , 1996, Journal of biomechanics.

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

[73]  Koepke Gh,et al.  Effect of liner materials on interface pressures in below-knee prostheses. , 1970 .

[74]  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.

[75]  J. Sanders,et al.  Effects of alignment changes on stance phase pressures and shear stresses on transtibial amputees: measurements from 13 transducer sites. , 1998, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[76]  H. Stinus,et al.  Biomechanik und Beurteilung des mikroprozessorgesteuerten Exoprothesenkniegelenkes C-Leg , 2000 .

[77]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  Effect of prosthetic mass on swing phase work during above-knee amputee ambulation. , 1997, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[78]  H Stinus [Biomechanics and evaluation of the microprocessor-controlled C-Leg exoprosthesis knee joint]. , 2000, Zeitschrift fur Orthopadie und ihre Grenzgebiete.

[79]  S B Sepic,et al.  Gait patterns in above-knee amputee patients: hydraulic swing control vs constant-friction knee components. , 1983, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[80]  Lang Yang The influence of limb alignment on the gait of above-knee amputees , 1991, Journal of biomechanics.

[81]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  Joint moment and muscle power output characteristics of below knee amputees during running: the influence of energy storing prosthetic feet. , 1991, Journal of biomechanics.

[82]  G H Koepke,et al.  Negative pressures during swing phase in below-knee prostheses with rubber sleeve suspension. , 1975, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[83]  Stein Rb,et al.  Improved ankle-foot system for above-knee amputees. , 1986 .

[84]  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 .

[85]  J. Perry,et al.  Prosthetic weight acceptance mechanics in transtibial amputees wearing the Single Axis, Seattle Lite, and Flex Foot. , 1997, IEEE transactions on rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[86]  A M Boonstra,et al.  Energy cost during ambulation in transfemoral amputees: a knee joint with a mechanical swing phase control vs a knee joint with a pneumatic swing phase control. , 1995, Scandinavian journal of rehabilitation medicine.

[87]  J Perry,et al.  Below-knee amputee gait in stair ambulation. A comparison of stride characteristics using five different prosthetic feet. , 1994, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[88]  Donald G. Shurr,et al.  Mechanical Gait Analysis of Transfemoral Amputees: SACH Foot Versus the Flex-Foot , 1997 .

[89]  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.

[90]  Donald G. Shurr,et al.  Transfemoral Amputee Physiological Requirements: Comparisons Between SACH Foot Walking and Flex-Foot Walking , 1997 .

[91]  R W Wirta,et al.  Effect on gait using various prosthetic ankle-foot devices. , 1991, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[92]  L M Bouter,et al.  Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group for Spinal Disorders. , 1997, Spine.