Temporal–spatial parameters of gait in transfemoral amputees: Comparison of bionic and mechanically passive knee joints

Background: A symmetrical gait affords the most efficient walking pattern. Bionic prostheses should provide better gait symmetry than mechanically passive prostheses with respect to a nonpathological gait. Objectives: To compare the basic temporal–spatial parameters of gait in transfemoral amputees fitted with bionic or mechanically passive prosthetic knees with those of subjects with a nonpathological gait. Study design: Three-dimensional gait analysis using an optoelectronic device. Methods: Eight transfemoral amputees participated in the study. Subjects walked across two dynamometric platforms a total of 15 times. Movement kinematics were measured using optoelectronic stereophotogrammetry. Results: The swing time of the affected limb in patients fitted with a mechanically passive knee joint was longer than that of the nonaffected limb by 0.055 s (effect size = 1.57). Compared with the control group, the swing time of the prosthetic limb in patients fitted with a mechanically passive knee was longer by 0.042 s (effect size = 2.1). Similarly, the stance time of the nonaffected limb was longer by 0.047 s (effect size = 1.07). Conclusions: Compared with a mechanically passive knee joint, a bionic knee joint evinced gait symmetry. Both the stance time and the swing time for amputees with a bionic knee were similar to those of nonamputees. Clinical relevance Prosthetists aim to design prostheses that achieve a good symmetry between the healthy and affected limbs. The use of bionic technology achieves a level of symmetry approaching that observed in nonamputees.

[1]  E R Draper,et al.  A treadmill-based system for measuring symmetry of gait. , 2000, Medical engineering & physics.

[2]  W G Hopkins,et al.  Measures of Reliability in Sports Medicine and Science , 2000, Sports medicine.

[3]  Andre Seyfarth,et al.  Functional gait asymmetry of unilateral transfemoral amputees. , 2012, Human movement science.

[4]  S. J. Stanhope,et al.  Kinematic-based technique for event time determination during gait , 1990, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[5]  Joanne K Gronely,et al.  Impact of stance phase microprocessor-controlled knee prosthesis on ramp negotiation and community walking function in K2 level transfemoral amputees , 2012, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[6]  Denny J. Padgett,et al.  Gait and balance of transfemoral amputees using passive mechanical and microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees. , 2007, Gait & posture.

[7]  R. Bartlett,et al.  Extended Book Review: Introduction to Sports Biomechanics: Analysing Human Movement Patterns, 2nd Edn. , 2008 .

[8]  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.

[9]  T. Lejeune,et al.  Effect of speed on kinematic, kinetic, electromyographic and energetic reference values during treadmill walking , 2008, Neurophysiologie Clinique/Clinical Neurophysiology.

[10]  C. Twine,et al.  Surgical factors in the prevention of infection following major lower limb amputation. , 2012, European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery.

[11]  M. B. Silver-Thorn,et al.  Functional Stability of Transfemoral Amputee Gait Using the 3R80 and Total Knee 2000 Prosthetic Knee Units , 2009 .

[12]  W. Frontera Editorial Notes to Begin 2005 , 2005 .

[13]  F. Herrmann,et al.  Major lower limb amputations in the elderly observed over ten years: the role of diabetes and peripheral arterial disease. , 2005, Diabetes & metabolism.

[14]  H. Herr,et al.  A Clinical Comparison of Variable-Damping and Mechanically Passive Prosthetic Knee Devices , 2005, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[15]  Malte Bellmann,et al.  Comparative biomechanical analysis of current microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee joints. , 2010, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[16]  B. R. Umberger,et al.  Understanding Muscle Energetics in Locomotion: New Modeling and Experimental Approaches , 2011, Exercise and sport sciences reviews.

[17]  Dale W. Berry,et al.  Microprocessor prosthetic knees. , 2006, Physical medicine and rehabilitation clinics of North America.

[18]  S B Sepic,et al.  Gait patterns of above-knee amputees using constant-friction knee components. , 1980, Bulletin of prosthetics research.

[19]  A. Lees,et al.  Adjustments in gait symmetry with walking speed in trans-femoral and trans-tibial amputees. , 2003, Gait & posture.

[20]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg and Mauch SNS prosthetic knees. , 2006, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[21]  F. Prince,et al.  Symmetry and limb dominance in able-bodied gait: a review. , 2000, Gait & posture.

[22]  J. Paysant,et al.  Kinematics in the terminal swing phase of unilateral transfemoral amputees: microprocessor-controlled versus swing-phase control prosthetic knees. , 2010, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[23]  B. Nigg,et al.  Asymmetries in ground reaction force patterns in normal human gait. , 1989, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.