Abstract-Substantial evidence suggests that the design and associated mechanical function of lower-limb prostheses affects user health and mobility, supporting common standards of clinical practice for appropriate matching of prosthesis design and user needs. This matching process is dependent on accurate and reliable methods for the functional classification of prosthetic components. The American Orthotic & Prosthetic Association developed a set of tests for L-code characterization of prosthesis mechanical properties to facilitate functional classification of passive below-knee prosthetic components. The mechanical tests require use of test-specific fixtures to be installed in a materials testing machine by a test administrator. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the interrater reliability of test outcomes between two administrators using the same testing facility. Ten prosthetic components (8 feet and 2 pylons) that spanned the range of commercial designs were subjected to all appropriate tests. Tests with scalar outcomes demonstrated high interrater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1) >/= 0.935), and there was no discrepancy in observation-based outcomes between administrators, suggesting that between-administrator variability may not present a significant source of error. These results support the integration of these mechanical tests for prosthesis classification, which will help enhance objectivity and optimization of the prosthesis-patient matching process for maximizing rehabilitation outcomes.
Rectification maps and template were used to facilitate teaching and central fabrication of the Northwestern University Flexible Sub-Ischial Vacuum Socket. Minor issues with quality of initial fit achieved with the template may be due to inability to adjust the template to patient characteristics (e.g. tissue type, limb shape) and/or the degree to which it represented a fully mature version of the technique. Clinical relevance Rectification maps help communicate an important step in the fabrication of the Northwestern University Flexible Sub-Ischial Vacuum Socket facilitating dissemination of the technique, while the average template provides an alternative fabrication option via computer-aided design-computer-aided manufacturing and central fabrication.
Aims It has been hypothesized that a unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is more likely to be revised than a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) because conversion surgery to a primary TKA is a less complicated procedure. The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a lower threshold for revising a UKA compared with TKA based on Oxford Knee Scores (OKSs) and range of movement (ROM) at the time of revision. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 619 aseptic revision cases performed between December 1998 and October 2018. This included 138 UKAs that underwent conversion to TKA and 481 initial TKA revisions. Age, body mass index (BMI), time in situ, OKS, and ROM were available for all patients. Results There were no differences between the two groups based on demographics or time to revision. The top reasons for aseptic TKA revision were loosening in 212 (44%), instability in 88 (18%), and wear in 69 (14%). UKA revision diagnoses were primarily for loosening in 50 (36%), progression of osteoarthritis (OA) in 50 (36%), and wear in 17 (12%). Out of a maximum 48 points, the mean OKS of the UKAs before revision was 23 (SD 9.3), which was significantly higher than the TKAs at 19.2 (SD 9.8; p < 0.001). UKA patients scored statistically better on nine of the 12 individual OKS questions. The UKA cases also had a larger pre-revision mean ROM (114°, SD 14.3°) than TKAs (98°, SD 25°) ; p < 0.001). Conclusion At revision, the mean UKA OKSs and ROM were significantly better than those of TKA cases. This study suggests that at our institution there is a difference in preoperative OKS between UKA and TKA at the time of revision, demonstrating a revision bias. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):91–95.
While many studies have attempted to characterize the mechanical behavior of passive prosthetic feet to understand their influence on amputee gait, the relationship between mechanical design and biomechanical performance has not yet been fully articulated from a fundamental physics perspective. A novel framework, called Lower Leg Trajectory Error (LLTE) framework, presents a means of quantitatively optimizing the constitutive model of prosthetic feet to match a reference kinematic and kinetic dataset. This framework can be used to predict the required stiffness and geometry of a prosthesis to yield a desired biomechanical response. A passive prototype foot with adjustable ankle stiffness was tested by a unilateral transtibial amputee to evaluate this framework. The foot condition with LLTE-optimal ankle stiffness enabled the user to replicate the physiological target dataset within 16% RMS error. Specifically, the measured kinematic variables matched the target kinematics within 4% RMS error. Testing a range of ankle stiffness conditions from 1.5 to 24.4 Nm/deg with the same user indicated that conditions with lower LLTE values deviated the least from the target kinematic data. Across all conditions, the framework predicted the horizontal/vertical position, and angular orientation of the lower leg during mid-stance within 1.0 cm, 0.3 cm, and 1.5 degrees, respectively. This initial testing suggests that prosthetic feet designed with low LLTE values could benefit users. The LLTE framework is agnostic to specific foot designs and kinematic/kinetic user targets, and could be used to design and customize prosthetic feet.
Models and simulations can be used to gain insight into functioning of systems of interest. We have developed a three-dimensional model to assess the effect of ankle joint axis misalignments in ankle-foot orthoses. The model has been incorporated into a freely available computer program to assist understanding of trainees and others interested in orthotics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.