Design of a Device for Lower Limb Prophylaxis and Exercise

Vinay, K Aggarwal; Nagaraj, Krishna; Arvinda, H R; Vazhayil, Vikas; Rao, Madhav

doi:10.1109/jtehm.2020.3037018

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8,27,32 The type of ambulatory assistive device prescribed can affect the extent to which muscle atrophy is experienced because of the variability in limb positioning, muscle activation, and blood flow to the extremity. 1,12,23,27,35 A study by Sanders et al examined the relationship between electromyographic (EMG) activity in lower extremity muscles while using different ambulatory assistive devices, including a knee scooter, standard axillary crutches, and a novel prosthetic device. 27 It found that use of these devices resulted in different levels of muscle activity compared with normal walking gait.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…27 Decreased muscle activity presents further risks as this decrease can reduce blood flow in the extremity and can reduce the force applied to venous walls, resulting in stagnation or reduced flow that can result in deep vein thrombosis. 1,12,35 Although the knee scooter remains a popular ambulatory aid, there is the potential for negative secondary effects of its use and it has the requirement of being piloted by 3 of 4 limbs. 16 Newer ambulatory devices, like the hands-free single crutch (HFSC), have been created to increase functional recovery in patients requiring nonweightbearing treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

EMG Activity With Use of a Hands-Free Single Crutch vs a Knee Scooter

Dewar

Grindstaff

Farmer

et al. 2021

Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Foot and ankle injuries frequently require a period of nonweightbearing, resulting in muscle atrophy. Our previous study compared a hands-free single crutch (HFSC) to standard axillary crutches and found increased muscle recruitment and intensity while using the HFSC. Knee scooters are another commonly prescribed nonweightbearing device. The purpose of this study is to examine the electromyographic (EMG) differences between an HFSC and knee scooter, in conjunction with device preference and perceived exertion. Methods: A randomized crossover study was performed using 30 noninjured young adults. Wireless surface EMG electrodes were placed on the belly of the rectus femoris (RF), vastus lateralis (VL), lateral gastrocnemius (LG), and gluteus maximus (GM). Participants then ambulated along a 20-m walking area while 15 seconds of the gait cycle was recorded across 3 conditions: walking with a knee scooter, an HFSC, and with no assistive device. Mean muscle activity and peak EMG activity were recorded for each ambulatory modality. Immediately following testing, patient exertion and device preference was recorded. Results: The RF, LG, and GM showed increased peak EMG activity percentage, and the LG showed increased mean muscle activity while using the HFSC compared with the knee scooter. When comparing the knee scooter and HFSC to walking, both showed increased muscle activity in the RF, VL, and LG but no difference in the GM. There was no statistical difference in participant preference, whereas the HFSC had a statistically significant higher perceived exertion than the knee scooter ( P < .001). Conclusion: In this group of young, healthy noninjured volunteers, the HFSC demonstrated increased peak EMG activity in most muscle groups tested compared with the knee scooter. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative study.

show abstract