Long-term clinical evaluation of the automatic stance-phase lock-controlled prosthetic knee joint in young adults with unilateral above-knee amputation

Andrysek, Jan; Wright, Virginia; Rotter, Karin; García, Daniela; Valdebenito, Rebeca; Mitchell, Carlos Alvarez; Rozbaczylo, Claudio; Cubillos, Rafael

doi:10.3109/17483107.2016.1173730

Cited by 16 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There was good correlation between the SEW values for level walking and other clinical outcome measures. Andrysek (2017) [ 64 ] Long-term clinical evaluation of the automatic stance-phase lock-controlled prosthetic knee joint in young adults with unilateral above-knee amputation 10 participants (All AK) Power Walker EX-510 (P. Anterior/ medial of thigh) Steps/day (2 weeks) Compare the ASPL knee to the WBA knee on step count, walking speed and energy expenditure. Participants did not tend to alter their walking speed or step count with the ASPL knee, but a reduction in energy expenditure was found.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The 27 papers on comparing interventions for lower-limb prosthesis users mostly compared prosthetic components, rather than comparing lifestyle interventions. Studies compared different sockets [ 66 , 79 , 84 ], suspension systems [ 68 , 78 ], knees [ 12 , 64 , 72 – 74 , 87 ], pylons [ 65 ] and feet [ 63 , 70 , 76 , 82 , 83 , 88 , 99 ]. One study compared knees and pylons [ 77 ], and one compared torsion and rigid adapters [ 85 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell

Diment

Micó-Amigo

et al. 2020

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Understanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper-and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring, with particular focus on low-resource settings. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis users during daily-living. Results: Sixty lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lowerlimb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm. Conclusions: Activity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user's requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell

Diment

Micó-Amigo

et al. 2020

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 27 papers on comparing interventions for lower-limb prosthesis users mostly compared prosthetic components, rather than comparing lifestyle interventions. Studies compared different sockets, 66,79,84 suspension systems, 68,78 knees, 12,64,[72][73][74]87 pylons 65 and feet. 63,70,76,82,83,88,100 One study compared knees and pylons, 77 and one compared torsion and rigid adapters.…”

Section: Figure 1 Flow Chart Of Selection and Sorting Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell¹,

Diment²,

Amigo³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundUnderstanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper- and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis-users during daily-living.Results60 lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lower-limb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm.ConclusionsActivity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user’s requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.

show abstract

“…This may be explained by an assertion of Seymour (2002) that the more proximal the amputation, more energy is demanded from the cardiovascular and pulmonary systems, and the less can the energy demand be satisfied for functional and social activities. Moreover, the absence of a functional knee joint amongthe above-knee amputation group may also be a contributing factor to their functional limitation because the presence of the knee joint in individuals with amputation was reported to improve stability and enhance function (Andrysek et al, 2016). It was found that there was a significantly better level of social functioning and participation among individuals using prosthetic mobility aids compared to their counterparts with non-prosthetic mobility aids (Table 7).While prosthetic users could move easily around their homes and in the community, non-prosthetic users -particularly those using wheelchairs -may find the environment as an obstacle to social participation.…”

Section: Participants' Levels Of Social Functioning and Participationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life Accomplishment, Social Functioning and Participation of South-Eastern Nigerians with Lower Limb Amputation

Akosile

Okonkwo

Maruf

et al. 2020

DCID

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: For a better understanding of the possible impact of impairments and disabilities on the life of individuals with lower limb amputation,it is important to explore the levels of Life Accomplishment (LA), Social Functioning and Participation (SFP) among them.The present study, set in SouthEastern Nigeria, aimed to study these levels and the influence of selected clinical and demographic variables on these constructs. Method: This cross-sectional survey involved 60 individuals with lower limb amputation (46 unilateral, 14 bilateral) recruited from all the five SouthEastern Nigerian States. The Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ), Participation Scale and Life Habit Questionnaire were used for measuring levels of social functioning, social participation and life accomplishment, respectively. Data was analysed using descriptive statistics of frequency count, percentages, mean and standard deviation. Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to test the hypotheses. Alpha level was set at 0.05. Results: Most of the participants (51.7%-58.3%) had low levels of social functioning across SFQ domains. Most of them (61.7%) had severe participation restrictions, and they all had reduced life accomplishments. Participants with bilateral amputation had poorer levels of social functioning (P<0.0001), participation restriction (P<0.0001), and life habits accomplishment (P<0.0001) than their counterparts with unilateral amputation. Individuals with below-knee amputation had significantly better levels of social functioning (P<0.0001) and participation (P<0.0001) than those with above-knee amputation. Participants with prosthetic mobility aids had significantly better levels of social functioning

show abstract

Long-term clinical evaluation of the automatic stance-phase lock-controlled prosthetic knee joint in young adults with unilateral above-knee amputation

Abstract: Potential benefits of the ASPL knee were identified in this study by functional measures, questionnaires and user feedback, but not changes in activity or the PEQ.

Cited by 16 publications

References 31 publications

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Life Accomplishment, Social Functioning and Participation of South-Eastern Nigerians with Lower Limb Amputation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About