2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2011.11.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Principles of obstacle avoidance with a transfemoral prosthetic limb

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, in response to this strategy, swing-phase knee flexion may be reduced such that toe clearance is compromised. Previous studies of transfemoral amputee gait have shown that subjects compensate for insufficient knee flexion during swing phase by circumducting their affected-side hip and plantarflexing their intact ankle [24,48]. Therefore, we might expect one or both of these compensatory strategies to manifest during swing phase with POST.…”
Section: Late-stance Response To Alignment Perturbationmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…For example, in response to this strategy, swing-phase knee flexion may be reduced such that toe clearance is compromised. Previous studies of transfemoral amputee gait have shown that subjects compensate for insufficient knee flexion during swing phase by circumducting their affected-side hip and plantarflexing their intact ankle [24,48]. Therefore, we might expect one or both of these compensatory strategies to manifest during swing phase with POST.…”
Section: Late-stance Response To Alignment Perturbationmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Specifically, it is assumed that during early stance phase, persons with transfemoral amputation exert a hip extension moment to shift the ground reaction force (GRF) vector anterior to the knee joint center, thereby promoting knee extension for stable weight bearing. Conversely, it is assumed that during late stance phase, persons with transfemoral amputation exert a hip flexion moment to reorient the GRF vector so that it is posterior to the knee joint center, thereby triggering knee flexion in preparation for limb advancement [24]. Additionally, persons with transfemoral amputation may influence the GRF vector acting at their knee joint by altering the angle at which they place their foot on the ground [25,26] or by varying their body center of mass position through postural adjustments of their trunk [27][28][29][30].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A TFP user might adopt a compensatory strategy such as circumduction, hip hiking, vaulting, and/or hip flexion-extension strategy for foot clearance when the prosthetic knee cannot provide sufficient foot clearance. [43][44][45][46][47] Such compensatory strategies can cause larger deviations from normal gait, increased hip effort, influence metabolic energy consumption, and secondary health disorders with the long-term use of prosthesis. [48][49][50][51] Hence, the prosthetic knee and its recommended alignment should be designed to extend completely before heel contact without compromising foot clearance and thereby reduce compensatory strategies as much as possible.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Components between the prosthetic knee and the ankle-foot prosthesis are changed to keep the height of the prosthesis the same throughout the experiment. Similar prosthetic simulators have been used to study the gait of an individual with a transfemoral amputation 27–30 because simulators exhibit similar kinematic and kinetic joint mechanics during gait 31 . Our rationale for using a prosthetic simulator as opposed to individuals with an amputation includes ease of recruitment and experimentation, the ability of each participant to serve as his or her own able-bodied control, and the provision of a method to evaluate the CAPA in the early stages of development without putting individuals with an amputation through undue stress.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%