The validity of forceplate data as a measure of rapid and targeted volitional movements of the centre of mass in transtibial prosthesis users

Rusaw, David

doi:10.1080/17483107.2016.1222002

Cited by 6 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This has been achieved using test protocols such as the limits of stability (LOS) test, which assesses participants' ability to perform targeted volitional centre of mass (CoM) movements during upright posture. In addition, the LOS test has been validated for expressing volitional postural movement in prosthesis users 18 . These test protocols are important as they assess voluntary postural control and demand utilisation of the range of motion of the prosthetic ankle/foot componentry, reflecting the daily challenges faced by prosthesis users.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Predictive Relationships Exist Between Postural Control and Falls Efficacy in Unilateral Transtibial Prosthesis Users?

Barnett

Vanicek

Rusaw

2018

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Predictive Relationships Exist Between Postural Control and Falls Efficacy in Unilateral Transtibial Prosthesis Users?

Barnett

Vanicek

Rusaw

2018

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Often, these methods rely on extracting information about postural stability via displacement of the centre of pressure (CoP) [19]. Movement of the CoP as a model for movement of centre of mass (CoM) in TPUs has been validated in quiet standing [20] and during rapid movements in TPUs [21]. It has been shown that TPUs have larger adaptations following support surface perturbations resulting in larger displacements of CoP on the intact limb and controls when compared to the prosthetic side [9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptations from the prosthetic and intact limb during standing on a sway-referenced support surface for transtibial prosthesis users

Rusaw

2018

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To investigate the bilateral postural adaptations as a result of standing on an increasingly unstable sway-referenced support surface with both the intact and prosthetic limb for transtibial prosthesis users (TPUs). Method: TPUs (n = 14) and matched controls (n = 14) stood quietly in multiple foot placement conditions (intact foot, prosthetic foot and both feet) on a sway-referenced support surface which matched surface rotation to the movement of the centre of pressure (CoP). Force and motion data were collected and used to analyse CoP mean position, displacement integral and force components under intact and prosthetic limbs. Results: Significant differences were found between prosthesis users and controls in CoP mean position in anteroposterior (1.5 (95% CI, 1.2-1.8) cm) and mediolateral directions (3.1 (95% CI, 0.5-5.7) cm. CoP displacement integrals were significantly different greater for prosthesis user group in the anteroposterior direction. Force components differences were found in all planes (anteroposterior: 0.6 (95% CI, 0.4-0.8 N); mediolateral: 0.1 (95% CI, 0.0-0.2 N & 0.3 (95% CI, 0.2-0.4) N, inferosuperior: 2.2 (95% CI, 1.4-3.0) N). Conclusions: TPUs have bilateral static and dynamic postural adaptations when standing on a swayreferenced support surface that is different to controls, and between prosthetic and intact sides. Results further support evidence highlighting importance of the intact limb in maintenance of postural control in prosthesis users. Differences indicate clinical treatment should be directed towards improving outcomes on the intact side. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION Prosthesis users have bilateral adaptations when standing on a sway referenced support surface These adaptations are different to controls, and between prosthetic and intact sides. The intact limb is the major contributor to maintenance of postural control in prosthesis users. Clinical treatment should account for this when interventions are designed.

show abstract

“…Studies that explicitly stated limitations or confounders were just over two-thirds of the total (Table 2),. 13,14,19–22,24,28–56,71,74,76,77,80–95,108,109,115–132,140–145,147–165,169–180,182–184,188–191,193–198 The most commonly mentioned limitation was small sample size, 20,22,24,28,29,32,33,35,37,39,40,42,45,47,52,54-57,74,80,82,86,87,89,93,95,109,118,119,121,123,126,129,141,143,145,148,149,154-159,161,164,169,172,183,198 followed by generalizability issues, 14,19-21,34,38,41,42,44,52-56,80,81,87,89,109,127-130,142,148,151,155,156,162,171,175-177,184,188,189,191,193,196 recall bias, 14,148,150,157,171,173,182,184 heterogeneous groups, 29,42,54,89,142,174,176,177 homogenous groups, 21,38,39,44,45,91,164 and convenience samples. 14,161,176,177,196…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative methods used to evaluate balance, postural control, and the fear of falling in lower limb prosthesis users: A systematic review

Johansson

Jensen

Barnett

et al. 2023

Prosthetics &Amp; Orthotics International

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Problems with balance, postural control, and fear of falling are highly prevalent in lower limb prosthesis users, with much research conducted to understand these issues. The variety of tools used to assess these concepts presents a challenge when interpreting research outcomes. This systematic review aimed to provide a synthesis of quantifiable methods used in the evaluation of balance, postural control, and fear of falling in lower limb prosthesis users with an amputation level at or proximal to the ankle joint. A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL, Medline, AMED, Cochrane, AgeLine, Scopus, Web of Science, Proquest, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, and PubPsych databases followed by additional manual searching via reference lists in the reviewed articles databases. Included articles used quantitative measure of balance or postural control as one of the dependent variables, lower limb prosthesis users as a sample group, and were published in a peer-reviewed journal in English. Relevant assessment questions were created by the investigators to rate the assessment methods used in the individual studies. Descriptive and summary statistics are used to synthesize the results. The search yielded (n 5 187) articles assessing balance or postural control (n 5 5487 persons in total) and (n 5 66) articles assessing fear of falling or balance confidence (n 5 7325 persons in total). The most used test to measure balance was the Berg Balance Scale and the most used test to measure fear of falling was the Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale. A large number of studies did not present if the chosen methods were valid and reliable for the lower limb prosthesis users. Among study limitations, small sample size was common.

show abstract

The validity of forceplate data as a measure of rapid and targeted volitional movements of the centre of mass in transtibial prosthesis users

Cited by 6 publications

References 28 publications

Do Predictive Relationships Exist Between Postural Control and Falls Efficacy in Unilateral Transtibial Prosthesis Users?

Do Predictive Relationships Exist Between Postural Control and Falls Efficacy in Unilateral Transtibial Prosthesis Users?

Adaptations from the prosthetic and intact limb during standing on a sway-referenced support surface for transtibial prosthesis users

Quantitative methods used to evaluate balance, postural control, and the fear of falling in lower limb prosthesis users: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About