Functional evaluation by gait analysis of various ankle-foot assemblies used by below-knee amputees

Abstract

Twelve different prosthetic feet were tested by 10 male subjects with right below-knee amputations. Level walking with each prosthetic foot was investigated using a pair of force plates. Five parameters were selected to compare the functional characteristics of the feet: 1) step length, 2) walking velocity on the sound side in relation to the prosthetic side, 3) depth of valley in the pattern of the vertical component of the floor reaction force, 4) efficiency of the deceleration and acceleration by the prosthetic foot, and 5) irregular patterns in the wave form of the fore and aft components of the floor reaction force. Each of the above parameters was rated numerically. The total score of the objective evaluation attained by analysing the five parameters showed some coincidence to the results of subjective evaluation. However, a good correlation existed between the objective negative score and the subjective negative rating (p < 0.05). Non-axial feet developed recently, such as the SAFE II and Seattle Light feet achieved higher scores in the older age group, while single-axis feet, such as the LAPOC and Otto Bock feet achieved higher scores in the younger age group (p < 0.05).

Biomechanical parameters of gait among transtibial amputees: a review

“…Mizuno et al 15 analyzed the GRF associated with spatial-temporal parameters to characterize 12 different prosthetic feet (three uniaxial, two multiaxial and seven rigid feet). Symmetry indices were calculated: 1-stride length rate; 2-speed rate; 3-efficiency of deceleration and acceleration; 4-magnitude of deflexing of the vertical GRF component from the first to the second peak; and 5-patterns presented by the anteroposterior component of the GRF.…”

“…Studies on GRF among amputee populations have focused on analysis of the vertical component, 6,9,12,14,15,17 while few have explored the anteroposterior 12,15 and mediolateral 12 components. Zmitrewicz et al 25 drew attention towards analysis of the anteroposterior component, because this leads to understanding of the specific parameters relating to the braking and propulsion phases.…”

“…8,9 Studies on kinetics seek to elucidate the mechanisms for control and management of movement, 2,10,11 and to provide ample knowledge of the behavior of the ground reaction force (GRF). 5,[12][13][14][15] Through electromyography, the main muscle strategies developed can be elucidated. 5,11,16,17 In all cases, the influence of prosthetic components such as feet, 10,15,[18][19][20][21] factors in experimental protocols such as speed 6,7,17,21 and characteristics of amputation 15 are noted in relation to movement.…”

A biomechanical comparison of the SACH, Seattle and Jaipur feet using ground reaction forces

“…There are numerous reports in the literature which evaluate the different prosthetic feet (Edelstein, 1984;Goh er al., 1984;Wagner et al, 1987;Michael, 1987;Murray, 1988;Torbum et al, 1990;Mizuno et al, 1992) but only one previous report in English literature (North er aL, 1974) has investigated some of the biomechanical properties of the Jaipur foot. They used a strain gauged pylon dynamometer to measure the axial load, torque, medio-lateral and antero-posterior moments of the lower limb joints.…”

Comparison of gait using a Multiflex foot versus a Quantum foot in knee disarticulation amputees

“…the clinical team. Several studies have reported on differences in gait patterns in trans-tibia1 (Barth et al, 1992, Culham et al, 1986Mizuno et al, 1992;Wirta et al, 1991) and transfemoral (Goh et al, 1984;James and Stein, 1986) amputees resulting from the use of different feet. However, it has so far been difficult to make a choice for the individual patient from the many available artificial feet.…”