Abstract

BackgroundA shock-absorbing pylon (SAP) is a modular prosthetic component designed to attenuate impact forces, which unlike traditional pylons that are rigid, can compress to absorb, return, or dissipate energy. Previous studies found that walking with a SAP improved lower-limb prosthesis users’ comfort and residual limb pain. While longitudinal stiffness of a SAP has been shown to affect gait kinematics, kinetics, and work done by the entire lower limb, the energetic contributions from the prosthesis and the intact joints have not been examined. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of SAP stiffness and walking speed on the mechanical work contributions of the prosthesis (i.e., all components distal to socket), knee, and hip in individuals with a transtibial amputation.MethodsTwelve participants with unilateral transtibial amputation walked overground at their customary (1.22 ± 0.18 ms−1) and fast speeds (1.53 ± 0.29 ms−1) under four different levels of SAP stiffness. Power and mechanical work profiles of the leg joints and components distal to the socket were quantified. The effects of SAP stiffness and walking speed on positive and negative work were analyzed using two-factor (stiffness and speed) repeated-measure ANOVAs (α = 0.05).ResultsFaster walking significantly increased mechanical work from the SAP-integrated prosthesis (p < 0.001). Reducing SAP stiffness increased the magnitude of prosthesis negative work (energy absorption) during early stance (p = 0.045) by as much as 0.027 Jkg−1, without affecting the positive work (energy return) during late stance (p = 0.159), suggesting a damping effect. This energy loss was partially offset by an increase in residual hip positive work (as much as 0.012 Jkg−1) during late stance (p = 0.045). Reducing SAP stiffness also reduced the magnitude of negative work on the contralateral sound limb during early stance by 11–17% (p = 0.001).ConclusionsReducing SAP stiffness and faster walking amplified the prostheses damping effect, which redistributed the mechanical work, both in magnitude and timing, within the residual joints and sound limb. With its capacity to absorb and dissipate energy, future studies are warranted to determine whether SAPs can provide additional user benefit for locomotor tasks that require greater attenuation of impact forces (e.g., load carriage) or energy dissipation (e.g., downhill walking).

Highlights

  • A shock-absorbing pylon (SAP) is a modular prosthetic component designed to attenuate impact forces, which unlike traditional pylons that are rigid, can compress to absorb, return, or dissipate energy

  • Prior studies have suggested that wearing a prosthesis with a SAP can improve user comfort and reduce residual limb pain compared to walking with a rigid pylon [19, 22]

  • There is currently limited knowledge regarding how SAPs directly affect the prostheses’ ‘shock-absorbing’ capabilities—in particular, the mechanical work done on the prosthesis which relates to the energy absorption, storage, and/or return during walking

Read more

Summary

Introduction

A shock-absorbing pylon (SAP) is a modular prosthetic component designed to attenuate impact forces, which unlike traditional pylons that are rigid, can compress to absorb, return, or dissipate energy. Previous studies found that walking with a SAP improved lower-limb prosthesis users’ comfort and residual limb pain. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of SAP stiffness and walking speed on the mechanical work contributions of the prosthesis (i.e., all components distal to socket), knee, and hip in individuals with a transtibial amputation. Prior studies have suggested that wearing a prosthesis with a SAP can improve user comfort and reduce residual limb pain compared to walking with a rigid pylon [19, 22]. There is currently limited knowledge regarding how SAPs directly affect the prostheses’ ‘shock-absorbing’ capabilities—in particular, the mechanical work done on the prosthesis which relates to the energy absorption, storage, and/or return during walking

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call