BackgroundGood prosthetic suspension system secures the residual limb inside the prosthetic socket and enables easy donning and doffing. This study aimed to introduce, evaluate and compare a newly designed prosthetic suspension system (HOLO) with the current suspension systems (suction, pin/lock and magnetic systems).MethodsAll the suspension systems were tested (tensile testing machine) in terms of the degree of the shear strength and the patient’s comfort. Nine transtibial amputees participated in this study. The patients were asked to use four different suspension systems. Afterwards, each participant completed a questionnaire for each system to evaluate their comfort. Furthermore, the systems were compared in terms of the cost.ResultsThe maximum tensile load that the new system could bear was 490 N (SD, 5.5) before the system failed. Pin/lock, magnetic and suction suspension systems could tolerate loads of580 N (SD, 8.5), 350.9 (SD, 7) and 310 N (SD, 8.4), respectively. Our subjects were satisfied with the new hook and loop system, particularly in terms of easy donning and doffing. Furthermore, the new system is considerably cheaper (35 times) than the current locking systems in the market.ConclusionsThe new suspension system could successfully retain the prosthesis on the residual limb as a good alternative for lower limb amputees. In addition, the new system addresses some problems of the existing systems and is more cost effective than its counterparts.

The measurements of postural balance often involve measurement error, which affects the analysis and interpretation of the outcomes. In most of the existing clinical rehabilitation research, the ability to produce reliable measures is a prerequisite for an accurate assessment of an intervention after a period of time. Although clinical balance assessment has been performed in previous study, none has determined the intrarater test-retest reliability of static and dynamic stability indexes during dominant single stance. In this study, one rater examined 20 healthy university students (female=12, male=8) in two sessions separated by 7 day intervals. Three stability indexes--the overall stability index (OSI), anterior/posterior stability index (APSI), and medial/ lateral stability index (MLSI) in static and dynamic conditions--were measured during single dominant stance. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error measurement (SEM) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated. Test-retest ICCs for OSI, APSI, and MLSI were 0.85, 0.78, and 0.84 during static condition and were 0.77, 0.77, and 0.65 during dynamic condition, respectively. We concluded that the postural stability assessment using Biodex stability system demonstrates good-to-excellent test-retest reliability over a 1 week time interval.

Abstract.[Purpose] This paper reports the effects of orofacial myofunctional exercise using an oral cavity rehabilitation device on physiological parameters that include labial closure strength, tongue elevation strength, and the right and left facial skin elasticity.[Subjects] Seventeen females aged forty years old and above were initially recruited for this study. Thirteen performed the exercise for 14 weeks, and only 11 subjects continued the exercise for another 10 weeks.[Methods] Subjects were instructed to perform an orofacial myofunctional exercise using an oral rehabilitative device for three minutes, for four times a day. The non-parametric Wilcoxon test was conducted to examine the significance of physiological parameters induced by the orofacial myofunctional exercise. The measurements of the physiological parameters were carried out weekly for 14 weeks and 24 weeks after the intervention for 13 and 11 subjects, respectively.[Results] The findings showed that there were significant improvements in the median values of all parameters before and after performing the orofacial myofunctional exercise for 14 weeks or more.[Conclusion] These results suggest that the orofacial myofunctional exercise can be regarded as a potential non-invasive therapy for improvements of the labial closure strength and tongue elevation strength, which indirectly provide support for the facial tissue, and enhances facial skin elasticity.

BackgroundAchieving independent upright posture has known to be one of the main goals in rehabilitation following lower limb amputation. The purpose of this study was to compare postural steadiness of below knee amputees with visual alterations while wearing three different prosthetic feet.MethodsTen male below-knee amputees were instructed to stand quietly on the Biodex® balance platform while wearing solid ankle cushion heel (SACH), single axis (SA) and energy storage and release (ESAR) prosthetic foot under different visual input conditions (eyes-opened and eyes-closed). The overall stability index (OSI), anterior- posterior stability index (APSI), and medial-lateral stability index (MLSI) were computed. Perceived balance assessment of each foot was evaluated using Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) score.ResultsThe findings highlights that SACH showed lowest overall stability index (indicating less body sway) during eyes-opened (OSI: SACH = 1.09, SA = 1.58, ESAR = 1.59) and SA showed lowest overall stability index during eyes-closed (OSI: SACH = 2.52, SA = 2.30, ESAR = 2.76) condition. However, overall stability indexes between foot types did not differ significantly during eyes-opened or eyes-closed (p = 0.651). There was a trend of instability which occurred more in medial-lateral compared to anterior-posterior direction for all foot types, with significant result in ESAR foot(eyes-opened: MLSI = 1.59, APSI = 0.65, p = 0.034; eyes-closed: MLSI = 2.76, APSI = 1.80, p = 0.017, respectively). When comparing between visual conditions, stability score was significantly higher during eyes-closed compared to eyes-opened situations for SACH and ESAR foot (eyes-closed vs opened; SACH OSI: 3.43 vs 1.71, p = 0.018 and MLSI: 3.43 vs 1.71, p = 0.018; ESAR OSI: 3.58 vs 1.86, p = 0.043 and APSI: 1.80 vs 0.65, p = 0.027).ConclusionsThe results of this study suggested postural steadiness in below-knee amputees was not affected by the types of prosthetic foot during quiet upright standing, but was significantly affected when visual cues was absent.

Purpose. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of prosthetic foot types on the postural stability among transtibial amputees when standing on different support surfaces. Materials and Methods. The postural stability of 10 transtibial amputees wearing solid ankle cushion heel (SACH) foot, single-axis (SA) foot, and energy-saving and return (ESAR) foot was assessed. Results were compared with able-bodied participants. Anterior-posterior stability index (APSI), mediolateral stability index (MLSI), and overall stability index (OSI) were measured by computed posturography in an upright stance on firm, foam, and unstable support surfaces. Results. The mean OSI score of SACH foot was significantly lower than that of an ESAR foot when the participants were standing on a compliant surface. When compared to able-bodied group, MLSI score was significantly higher for each of the prosthetic foot groups while OSI score was significantly higher for ESAR foot only in foam condition. Conclusions. Differences between prosthetic foot types and groups (amputees versus able-bodied) can only be distinguished when individuals were standing on a compliant surface. Amputees exhibited an increased postural instability in the mediolateral direction than able-bodied individuals. Hence, the restoration of stability in the frontal plane and the enhancement of proprioception at the residual limb should be the basis of rehabilitation programs.