A comparison of two prosthetic feet on the multi-joint and multi-plane kinetic gait compensations in individuals with a unilateral trans-tibial amputation.

OBJECTIVE To determine the effects of two different prosthetic feet on the three-dimensional kinetic patterns of both the prosthetic and sound limbs during unilateral trans-tibial amputee gait. DESIGN Eleven individuals with a unilateral trans-tibial amputation participated in two walking sessions: once while using the conventional SAFE foot, the other while using the dynamic Flex foot. BACKGROUND Despite the wide variation in the design of prosthetic feet, the benefits of these prostheses remain unclear. METHODS During each test session, peak joint moments and powers in the sagittal, transverse and frontal planes were examined, as subjects walked at a comfortable speed. RESULTS The majority of the kinetic differences that occurred due to the changing of prosthetic foot type were limited to ankle joint variables in the sagittal plane with greater peak moments and power during propulsion for the Flex foot compared to the SAFE foot. However, effects were also found at joints proximal to the prosthesis (e.g. knee) and differences were also found in the kinetics of the sound limb. CONCLUSION The dynamic Flex foot allowed subjects to rely more heavily on the prosthetic foot for propulsion and stability during walking with minimal compensations at the remaining joints. RELEVANCE Determining the biomechanical differences between the conventional and dynamic prosthetic feet may advocate the use of one prosthetic foot type over another. This information, when used in conjunction with subjective preferences, may contribute to higher functioning and greater satisfaction for individuals with a lower limb amputation.

[1]  D. Winter,et al.  Control of whole body balance in the frontal plane during human walking. , 1993, Journal of biomechanics.

[2]  Y. Ehara,et al.  Energy storing property of so-called energy-storing prosthetic feet. , 1993, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[3]  D. Winter,et al.  Biomechanics of below-knee amputee gait. , 1988, Journal of biomechanics.

[4]  D. Winter Energy generation and absorption at the ankle and knee during fast, natural, and slow cadences. , 1983, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[5]  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.

[6]  Murray Mp,et al.  Kinematic and EMG patterns during slow, free, and fast walking , 1984, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[7]  D. Winter,et al.  Kinetic analysis of the lower limbs during walking: what information can be gained from a three-dimensional model? , 1995, Journal of biomechanics.

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

[9]  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.

[10]  Energy-storing prosthetic feet. , 1989, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[11]  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.

[12]  P. Allard,et al.  Lower Limb Muscle Power Relationships in Bilateral Able-Bodied Gait , 2001, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

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

[14]  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 .

[15]  K. Siegel,et al.  Biomechanical comparison of the energy-storing capabilities of SACH and Carbon Copy II prosthetic feet during the stance phase of gait in a person with below-knee amputation. , 1992, Physical therapy.