Amputee Independent Prosthesis Properties--a new model for description and measurement.

A model is presented for describing the Amputee Independent Prosthesis Properties (AIPP) of complete assemblies of trans-tibial prosthetic components distal to the socket. This new AIPP model includes features of both lumped parameter and roll-over models and describes prosthesis properties that are of importance in stance phase, including prosthetic foot geometry, normal stiffness, shear stiffness, and damping (energy dissipation). Methods are described for measuring the parameters of the AIPP model using a custom test-rig, commercial load-cell, and a motion capture system. Example data are presented for five pylon angles reflecting the shank angles seen in normal gait. Through the inclusion of measured AIPP in future in-vivo studies comparing different prostheses more generic information, as opposed to product specific claims, will become more widely available to inform future designs, prescription, and alignment procedures.

[1]  H B Skinner,et al.  Static load response of the heels of SACH feet. , 1985, Orthopedics.

[2]  Matthew J. Major,et al.  The influence of the mechanical properties of trans-tibial prostheses on amputee performance , 2010 .

[3]  S. Brophy,et al.  Interventions for latent autoimmune diabetes (LADA) in adults. , 2011, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[4]  D. Childress,et al.  Characterisation of prosthetic feet used in low-income countries , 2004, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[5]  Joseph M Czerniecki,et al.  Mechanical properties of shock-absorbing pylons used in transtibial prostheses. , 2004, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[6]  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.

[7]  Ellen J Mackenzie,et al.  Use and satisfaction with prosthetic limb devices and related services. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[8]  G. J. v. d. Water,et al.  Comparison of the lightweight Camp Normal Activity Foot with other prosthetic feet in trans-tibial amputees: A pilot study , 1998, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[9]  G K Klute,et al.  Comparison of human turning gait with the mechanical performance of lower limb prosthetic transverse rotation adapters , 2005, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[10]  Helco G van Keeken,et al.  Comparative roll-over analysis of prosthetic feet. , 2009, Journal of biomechanics.

[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. 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.

[13]  G K Klute,et al.  Modelling the effect of prosthetic feet and shoes on the heel-ground contact force in amputee gait , 2004, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[14]  H. Grootenboer,et al.  Stiffness and hysteresis properties of some prosthetic feet , 1990, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[15]  A H Hansen,et al.  Prosthetic foot rollover shapes with implications for alignment of transtibial prostheses , 2000, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[16]  A. Segal,et al.  Heel-region properties of prosthetic feet and shoes. , 2004, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[17]  K. Postema,et al.  Prescription of prosthetic ankle-foot mechanisms after lower limb amputation. , 2004, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[18]  M. Geil Energy Loss and Stiffness Properties of Dynamic Elastic Response Prosthetic Feet , 2001 .

[19]  Andrew Hansen Effects of Alignment on the Roll-Over Shapes of Prosthetic Feet , 2008, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

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

[21]  S G Kabra,et al.  Equipment and methods for laboratory testing of ankle-foot prostheses as exemplified by the Jaipur foot. , 1991, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[22]  L. Miller,et al.  Analysis of a vertical compliance prosthetic foot. , 1997, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[23]  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.

[24]  D. S. Childress,et al.  Mechanical characterization of prosthetic feet using a Prosthetic Foot Loading Apparatus , 2000, Proceedings of the 22nd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (Cat. No.00CH37143).

[25]  Mark D Geil,et al.  An iterative method for viscoelastic modeling of prosthetic feet. , 2002, Journal of biomechanics.

[26]  D. Childress,et al.  The Effects of Prosthetic Foot Roll-Over Shape Arc Length on the Gait of Trans-Tibial Prosthesis Users , 2006, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[27]  Gordon Bennett,et al.  Finite Element Analysis as a Tool for Parametric Prosthetic Foot Design and Evaluation. Technique Development in the Solid Ankle Cushioned Heel (SACH) Foot , 2003, Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering.

[28]  J. Perry,et al.  Gait Analysis , 2024 .