Prosthetic Stiffness Research Articles

Greater than recommended stiffness and power setting of a stance-phase powered leg prosthesis can improve step-to-step transition work and effective foot length ratio during walking in people with transtibial amputation.

People with unilateral transtibial amputation (TTA) using a passive-elastic prosthesis exhibit lower positive affected leg trailing work (ALtrail Wpos) and a greater magnitude of negative unaffected leg leading work (ULlead Wneg) during walking than non-amputees, which may increase joint pain and osteoarthritis risk in the unaffected leg. People with TTA using a stance-phase powered prosthesis (e.g., BiOM, Ottobock, Duderstadt, Germany) walk with increased ALtrail Wpos and potentially decreased magnitude of ULlead Wneg compared to a passive-elastic prosthesis. The BiOM includes a passive-elastic prosthesis with a manufacturer-recommended stiffness category and can be tuned to different power settings, which may change ALtrail Wpos, ULlead Wneg, and the prosthesis effective foot length ratio (EFLR). Thirteen people with TTA walked using 16 different prosthetic stiffness category and power settings on a level treadmill at 0.75-1.75m/s. We constructed linear mixed effects models to determine the effects of stiffness category and power settings on ALtrail Wpos, ULlead Wneg, and EFLR and hypothesized that decreased stiffness and increased power would increase ALtrail Wpos, not change and decrease ULlead Wneg magnitude, and decrease and not change prosthesis EFLR, respectively. We found there was no significant effect of stiffness category on ALtrail Wpos but increased stiffness reduced ULlead Wneg magnitude, perhaps due to a 0.02 increase in prosthesis EFLR compared to the least stiff category. Furthermore, we found that use of the BiOM with 10% and 20% greater than recommended power increased ALtrail Wpos and decreased ULlead Wneg magnitude at 0.75-1.00m/s. However, prosthetic power setting depended on walking speed so that use of the BiOM increased ULlead Wneg magnitude at 1.50-1.75m/s compared to a passive-elastic prosthesis. Ultimately, our results suggest that at 0.75-1.00m/s, prosthetists should utilize the BiOM attached to a passive-elastic prosthesis with an increased stiffness category and power settings up to 20% greater than recommended based on biological ankle values. This prosthetic configuration can allow people with unilateral transtibial amputation to increase ALtrail Wpos and minimize ULlead Wneg magnitude, which could reduce joint pain and osteoarthritis risk in the unaffected leg and potentially lower the metabolic cost of walking.

Effects of prosthetic stiffness and added mass on metabolic power and asymmetry in female runners with a leg amputation.

Similar to nonamputees, female athletes with unilateral transtibial amputation (TTA) using running-specific leg prostheses (RSPs) may have worse running economy and higher rates of running-related injury than male athletes. Optimizing RSP configuration for female athletes could improve running economy and minimize biomechanical asymmetry, which has been associated with running-related injury. Nine females with a TTA ran at 2.5 m/s while we measured metabolic rates and ground reaction forces. Subjects used an RSP with a manufacturer-recommended stiffness category, one category less stiff and two categories less stiff than recommended. Use of an RSP two categories less stiff resulted in 3.0% lower net metabolic power (P = 0.04), 7.8% lower affected leg stiffness (P = 6.01 × 10-4), increased contact time asymmetry (P = 0.04), and decreased stance average vertical ground reaction force asymmetry (P = 0.04) compared with a recommended stiffness category RSP. Lower RSP stiffness (kN/m) values were associated with lower net metabolic power (P = 0.02), lower affected leg stiffness (P = 1.36 × 10-4), longer affected leg contact time (P = 1.46 × 10-4), and similar affected leg peak and stance-average vertical ground reaction force compared with higher RSP stiffness values. Subjects then used the RSP stiffness category that elicited the lowest net metabolic power with 100 g, 200 g, and 300 g added distally. We found no significant effects of added mass on net metabolic power, biomechanics, or asymmetry. These results suggest that female runners with a TTA could decrease metabolic power during running while minimizing biomechanical asymmetries, which have been associated with running-related injury, by using an RSP two categories less stiff than manufacturer recommended.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Females with unilateral transtibial amputation can improve running performance through reductions in net metabolic power by using a running-specific prosthesis (RSP) that is less stiff than manufacturer-recommended. Lower RSP stiffness values are associated with greater leg stiffness and contact time asymmetry, and lower stance-average vertical ground reaction force asymmetry. However, we found that adding mass to the RSP did not affect net metabolic power and stance-phase biomechanical asymmetries during running.

Low-profile prosthetic foot stiffness category and size, and shoes affect axial and torsional stiffness and hysteresis.

Passive-elastic prosthetic feet are manufactured with numerical stiffness categories and prescribed based on the user's body mass and activity level, but mechanical properties, such as stiffness values and hysteresis are not typically reported. Since the mechanical properties of passive-elastic prosthetic feet and footwear can affect walking biomechanics of people with transtibial or transfemoral amputation, characterizing these properties can provide objective metrics for comparison and aid prosthetic foot prescription and design. We characterized axial and torsional stiffness values, and hysteresis of 33 categories and sizes of a commercially available passive-elastic prosthetic foot model [Össur low-profile (LP) Vari-flex] with and without a shoe. We assumed a greater numerical stiffness category would result in greater axial and torsional stiffness values but would not affect hysteresis. We hypothesized that a greater prosthetic foot length would not affect axial stiffness values or hysteresis but would result in greater torsional stiffness values. We also hypothesized that including a shoe would result in decreased axial and torsional stiffness values and greater hysteresis. Prosthetic stiffness was better described by curvilinear than linear equations such that stiffness values increased with greater loads. In general, a greater numerical stiffness category resulted in increased heel, midfoot, and forefoot axial stiffness values, increased plantarflexion and dorsiflexion torsional stiffness values, and decreased heel, midfoot, and forefoot hysteresis. Moreover, for a given category, a longer prosthetic foot size resulted in decreased heel, midfoot, and forefoot axial stiffness values, increased plantarflexion and dorsiflexion torsional stiffness values, and decreased heel and midfoot hysteresis. In addition, adding a shoe to the prosthetic foot resulted in decreased heel and midfoot axial stiffness values, decreased plantarflexion torsional stiffness values, and increased heel, midfoot, and forefoot hysteresis. Our results suggest that manufacturers should adjust the design of each category to ensure the mechanical properties are consistent across different sizes and highlight the need for prosthetists and researchers to consider the effects of shoes in combination with prostheses. Our results can be used to objectively compare the LP Vari-flex prosthetic foot to other prosthetic feet to inform their prescription, design, and use for people with a transtibial or transfemoral amputation.

NUMERICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE CHANGE IN THE MECHANICAL PROPERTIES INDUCED BY DIFFERENT MATERIAL INTERNAL FEATURES

In orthopedic medical devices, differences in elasto-plastic behavior between bone and metallic materials could lead to mechanical issues at the bone-implant interface, such as stress shielding, bone fracture or implant failure. To reduce mismatching-related adverse events between bone and prosthetic mechanical properties, an in-body geometry optimization could be the right approach to reduce prosthetic stiffness. Therefore, this study aims to assess the elastic behavior of four different in-body gap prismatic geometries (quadratic, hexagonal, octagonal, and circular) and how much they reduce bulk stiffness. Uniaxial compression tests were performed on five cubes with a 20[Formula: see text]mm thickness, each containing a different set of internal prismatic gaps. For each design, the elastic response was calculated and compared with a full-volume cube, used as control. All cubes showed a stiffness reduction compared to the control, greater in cubes with quadratic (21%), octagonal (18%), and circular (17%) transversal sections, compared to the hexagonal one (6%). Moreover, finite element models were implemented and tested, showing coherent values obtained through the experimental tests. In addition, a bi-material approach was studied in silico and the results suggested that variable elastic behavior could be obtained by using composite material, providing lower mechanical properties than commonly used commercial prosthetic materials.

Understanding patient preference in prosthetic ankle stiffness

BackgroundUser preference has the potential to facilitate the design, control, and prescription of prostheses, but we do not yet understand which physiological factors drive preference, or if preference is associated with clinical benefits.MethodsSubjects with unilateral below-knee amputation walked on a custom variable-stiffness prosthetic ankle and manipulated a dial to determine their preferred prosthetic ankle stiffness at three walking speeds. We evaluated anthropomorphic, metabolic, biomechanical, and performance-based descriptors at stiffness levels surrounding each subject’s preferred stiffness.ResultsSubjects preferred lower stiffness values at their self-selected treadmill walking speed, and elected to walk faster overground with ankle stiffness at or above their preferred stiffness. Preferred stiffness maximized the kinematic symmetry between prosthetic and unaffected joints, but was not significantly correlated with body mass or metabolic rate.ConclusionThese results imply that some physiological factors are weighted more heavily when determining preferred stiffness, and that preference may be associated with clinically relevant improvements in gait.

Comparison Method of Biomechanical Analysis of Trans-Tibial Amputee Gait with a Mechanical Test Machine Simulation

Energy-storing-and-returning prosthetic feet are frequently recommended for lower limb amputees. Functional performance and stiffness characteristics are evaluated by state-of-the-art biomechanical testing, while it is common practice for design engineers and researchers to use test machines to measure stiffness. The correlation between user-specific biomechanical measures and machine evaluation has not been thoroughly investigated, and mechanical testing for ramps is limited. In this paper, we propose a novel test method to assess prosthetic foot stiffness properties in the sagittal plane. First, biomechanical data were collected on five trans-tibial users using a variable stiffness prosthetic foot on a split-belt treadmill. Gait trials were performed on level ground and on an incline and a decline of 7.5°. The same prosthetic foot was tested on a roll-over test machine for the three terrains. The sagittal ankle moment and angle were compared for the two test methods. The dorsiflexion moment and angle were similar, while more variability was observed in the plantarflexion results. A good correlation was found for level-ground walking, while decline walking showed the largest differences in the results of the maximum angles. The roll-over test machine is a useful tool to speed up design iterations with a set design goal prior to user testing.

Comparing preference of ankle\u2013foot stiffness in below-knee amputees and prosthetists

When fitting prosthetic feet, prosthetists fuse information from their visual assessment of patient gait with the patient’s communicated perceptions and preferences. In this study, we sought to simultaneously and independently assess patient and prosthetist preference for prosthetic foot stiffness using a custom variable-stiffness prosthesis. In the first part of the experiment, seven subjects with below-knee amputation walked on the variable-stiffness prosthetic foot set to a randomized stiffness, while several prosthetist subjects simultaneously observed their gait. After each trial, the amputee subjects and prosthetist subjects indicated the change to stiffness that they would prefer (increase or decrease). This paradigm allowed us to simultaneously measure amputee subject and prosthetist subject preferences, and provided a reliability index indicating the consistency of their preferences. In the second part of the experiment, amputee subjects were instructed to communicate verbally with one prosthetist subject to arrive at a mutually preferred stiffness. On average, prosthetist subjects preferred a 26% higher stiffness than amputee subjects (p < 0.001), though this depended on the amputee subject (p < 0.001). Prosthetist subjects were also considerably less consistent than amputee subjects in their preferences (CV of 5.6% for amputee subjects, CV of 23% for prosthetist subjects; p = 0.014). Mutual preference seemed to be dictated by the specific patient-prosthetist dynamic, and no clear trends emerged.

Postoperative complication rates following total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) vs. reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA): A nationwide analysis

BackgroundHistorically, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has been the gold-standard of care for patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis refractory to nonoperative treatment. With expanding indications, utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has been rapidly increasing. The purpose of this study was to use a nationwide patient database with contemporary data to identify and compare joint and systemic complication rates following primary TSA and RSA. MethodsPatients records of patients receiving TSA or RSA were queried from PearlDiver (Fort Wayne, IN), a commercially available administrative claims database, using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and Tenth Revision (ICD-9/ICD-10) and Current Procedural Technology (CPT) codes. Incidences of postoperative joint complications were measured at 90-days and 1-year post-discharge. Incidences of systemic complications were measured at 90-days post-discharge. Complication rates were compared using logistic regression. Demographic data was also compared using chi-square analysis. ResultsFrom 2007 to 2017, a total of 17,681 patients received primary total shoulder arthroplasty: 8,846 (50%) received TSA and 8,835 (50%) received RSA. A greater proportion of patients that underwent RSA were female (p < 0.001), over the age of 80 (p < 0.001), and had a higher average Charlson comorbidity index (2.49 vs. 1.99, p < 0.001). At 90-days post-discharge, patients that received RSA were more likely to have prosthetic joint infection (OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.30–2.70), periprosthetic fracture (OR 4.01; 95% CI 3.32–4.87), prosthetic dislocation (OR 2.10; 95% CI 1.57–2.85), and adjacent local scapular/acromion fractures (OR 3.58; 95% CI 2.05–6.71). At 1-year, these patients still had a higher association with periprosthetic fracture (OR 3.66; 95% CI 3.08–4.38), prosthetic dislocation (OR 1.40; 95% CI 1.12–1.75), and local fractures (OR 3.10; 95% CI 2.10–4.73). Patients that underwent TSA were more likely to have prosthetic loosening (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.45–0.90) and prosthetic stiffness (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84–0.99). Additionally, patients that underwent RSA exhibited higher rates of DVT (OR 1.29; 95% CI 1.03–1.62), anemia (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.25–1.62), acute renal failure (ARF) (OR 1.35; 95% CI 1.13–1.61), pneumonia (OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.02–1.48), and respiratory failure (OR 1.81; 95% CI 1.46–2.26). ConclusionPatients undergoing RSA exhibited higher rates of joint complications at both 90-days and 1-year post-discharge. These patients also experienced higher rates of systemic complications in the 90-day postoperative period, likely due to overall poorer health status. Level of evidenceLevel III; Treatment Study

The Effect of Varying Prosthetic Foot Stiffness on Perceived Stiffness and Gait Biomechanics During Walking

The Effect of Varying Prosthetic Foot Stiffness on Perceived Stiffness and Gait Biomechanics During Walking

Dynamic elastic response prostheses alter approach angles and ground reaction forces but not leg stiffness during a start-stop task

In a dynamic elastic response prosthesis (DERP), spring-like properties aim to replace the loss of musculature and soft tissues and optimise dynamic movement biomechanics, yet higher intact limb (IL) loading exists. It is unknown how amputees wearing a DERP will perform in start-stop movements and how altering the prosthetic stiffness will influence the performance and loading. This study assessed movement dynamics through comparisons in spatiotemporal, kinematic and kinetic variables and leg stiffness of intact, prosthetic and control limbs. The effect of prosthetic stiffness on movement dynamics was also determined. Eleven male unilateral transtibial amputees performed a start-stop task with one DERP set at two different stiffness – Prescribed and Stiffer. Eleven control participants performed the movement with the dominant limb. Kinematic and kinetic data were collected by a twelve-camera motion capture system synchronised with a Kistler force platform. Selected variables were compared between intact, prosthetic and control limbs, and against prosthetic stiffness using ANOVA and effect size. Pearson’s Correlation was used to analyse relationship between leg stiffness and prosthetic deflection. Amputees showed a more horizontal approach to the bound during the start-stop movement, with lower horizontal velocities and a longer stance time on the IL compared to controls. In both stiffness conditions, the IL showed selected higher anteroposterior and vertical forces and impulses when compared to the controls. Leg stiffness was not significantly different between limbs as a result of the interplay between angle swept and magnitude of force, even with the change in prosthetic stiffness. A main effect for prosthetic stiffness was found only in higher impact forces of the prosthetic limb and more horizontal touchdown angles of the IL when using the prescribed DERP. In conclusion, amputees achieve the movement with a horizontal approach when compared to controls which may reflect difficulty of movement initiation with a DERP and a difficulty in performing the movement dynamically. The forces and impulses of the IL were high compared to control limbs. The consistent leg stiffness implies compensation strategies through other joints.

How do prosthetic stiffness, height and running speed affect the biomechanics of athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations?

Limited available information describes how running-specific prostheses and running speed affect the biomechanics of athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations. Accordingly, we quantified the effects of prosthetic stiffness, height and speed on the biomechanics of five athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations during treadmill running. Each athlete performed a set of running trials with 15 different prosthetic model, stiffness and height combinations. Each set of trials began with the athlete running on a force-measuring treadmill at 3 m s-1, subsequent trials incremented by 1 m s-1 until they achieved their fastest attainable speed. We collected ground reaction forces (GRFs) during each trial. Prosthetic stiffness, height and running speed each affected biomechanics. Specifically, with stiffer prostheses, athletes exhibited greater peak and stance average vertical GRFs (β = 0.03; p < 0.001), increased overall leg stiffness (β = 0.21; p < 0.001), decreased ground contact time (β = -0.07; p < 0.001) and increased step frequency (β = 0.042; p < 0.001). Prosthetic height inversely associated with step frequency (β = -0.021; p < 0.001). Running speed inversely associated with leg stiffness (β = -0.58; p < 0.001). Moreover, at faster running speeds, the effect of prosthetic stiffness and height on biomechanics was mitigated and unchanged, respectively. Thus, prosthetic stiffness, but not height, likely influences distance running performance more than sprinting performance for athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations.

Prosthetic model, but not stiffness or height, affects the metabolic cost of running for athletes with unilateral transtibial amputations.

Running-specific prostheses enable athletes with lower limb amputations to run by emulating the spring-like function of biological legs. Current prosthetic stiffness and height recommendations aim to mitigate kinematic asymmetries for athletes with unilateral transtibial amputations. However, it is unclear how different prosthetic configurations influence the biomechanics and metabolic cost of running. Consequently, we investigated how prosthetic model, stiffness, and height affect the biomechanics and metabolic cost of running. Ten athletes with unilateral transtibial amputations each performed 15 running trials at 2.5 or 3.0 m/s while we measured ground reaction forces and metabolic rates. Athletes ran using three different prosthetic models with five different stiffness category and height combinations per model. Use of an Ottobock 1E90 Sprinter prosthesis reduced metabolic cost by 4.3 and 3.4% compared with use of Freedom Innovations Catapult [fixed effect (β) = -0.177; P < 0.001] and Össur Flex-Run (β = -0.139; P = 0.002) prostheses, respectively. Neither prosthetic stiffness (P ≥ 0.180) nor height (P = 0.062) affected the metabolic cost of running. The metabolic cost of running was related to lower peak (β = 0.649; P = 0.001) and stance average (β = 0.772; P = 0.018) vertical ground reaction forces, prolonged ground contact times (β = -4.349; P = 0.012), and decreased leg stiffness (β = 0.071; P < 0.001) averaged from both legs. Metabolic cost was reduced with more symmetric peak vertical ground reaction forces (β = 0.007; P = 0.003) but was unrelated to stride kinematic symmetry (P ≥ 0.636). Therefore, prosthetic recommendations based on symmetric stride kinematics do not necessarily minimize the metabolic cost of running. Instead, an optimal prosthetic model, which improves overall biomechanics, minimizes the metabolic cost of running for athletes with unilateral transtibial amputations.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The metabolic cost of running for athletes with unilateral transtibial amputations depends on prosthetic model and is associated with lower peak and stance average vertical ground reaction forces, longer contact times, and reduced leg stiffness. Metabolic cost is unrelated to prosthetic stiffness, height, and stride kinematic symmetry. Unlike nonamputees who decrease leg stiffness with increased in-series surface stiffness, biological limb stiffness for athletes with unilateral transtibial amputations is positively correlated with increased in-series (prosthetic) stiffness.

Reduced prosthetic stiffness lowers the metabolic cost of running for athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations.

Inspired by the springlike action of biological legs, running-specific prostheses are designed to enable athletes with lower-limb amputations to run. However, manufacturer's recommendations for prosthetic stiffness and height may not optimize running performance. Therefore, we investigated the effects of using different prosthetic configurations on the metabolic cost and biomechanics of running. Five athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations each performed 15 trials on a force-measuring treadmill at 2.5 or 3.0 m/s. Athletes ran using each of 3 different prosthetic models (Freedom Innovations Catapult FX6, Össur Flex-Run, and Ottobock 1E90 Sprinter) with 5 combinations of stiffness categories (manufacturer's recommended and ± 1) and heights (International Paralympic Committee's maximum competition height and ± 2 cm) while we measured metabolic rates and ground reaction forces. Overall, prosthetic stiffness [fixed effect (β) = 0.036; P = 0.008] but not height (P ≥ 0.089) affected the net metabolic cost of transport; less stiff prostheses reduced metabolic cost. While controlling for prosthetic stiffness (in kilonewtons per meter), using the Flex-Run (β = -0.139; P = 0.044) and 1E90 Sprinter prostheses (β = -0.176; P = 0.009) reduced net metabolic costs by 4.3-4.9% compared with using the Catapult prostheses. The metabolic cost of running improved when athletes used prosthetic configurations that decreased peak horizontal braking ground reaction forces (β = 2.786; P = 0.001), stride frequencies (β = 0.911; P < 0.001), and leg stiffness values (β = 0.053; P = 0.009). Remarkably, athletes did not maintain overall leg stiffness across prosthetic stiffness conditions. Rather, the in-series prosthetic stiffness governed overall leg stiffness. The metabolic cost of running in athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations is influenced by prosthetic model and stiffness but not height.NEW & NOTEWORTHY We measured the metabolic rates and biomechanics of five athletes with bilateral transtibial amputations while running with different prosthetic configurations. The metabolic cost of running for these athletes is minimized by using an optimal prosthetic model and reducing prosthetic stiffness. The metabolic cost of running was independent of prosthetic height, suggesting that longer legs are not advantageous for distance running. Moreover, the in-series prosthetic stiffness governs the leg stiffness of athletes with bilateral leg amputations.

Characterizing the Mechanical Properties of Running-Specific Prostheses.

The mechanical stiffness of running-specific prostheses likely affects the functional abilities of athletes with leg amputations. However, each prosthetic manufacturer recommends prostheses based on subjective stiffness categories rather than performance based metrics. The actual mechanical stiffness values of running-specific prostheses (i.e. kN/m) are unknown. Consequently, we sought to characterize and disseminate the stiffness values of running-specific prostheses so that researchers, clinicians, and athletes can objectively evaluate prosthetic function. We characterized the stiffness values of 55 running-specific prostheses across various models, stiffness categories, and heights using forces and angles representative of those measured from athletes with transtibial amputations during running. Characterizing prosthetic force-displacement profiles with a 2nd degree polynomial explained 4.4% more of the variance than a linear function (p<0.001). The prosthetic stiffness values of manufacturer recommended stiffness categories varied between prosthetic models (p<0.001). Also, prosthetic stiffness was 10% to 39% less at angles typical of running 3 m/s and 6 m/s (10°-25°) compared to neutral (0°) (p<0.001). Furthermore, prosthetic stiffness was inversely related to height in J-shaped (p<0.001), but not C-shaped, prostheses. Running-specific prostheses should be tested under the demands of the respective activity in order to derive relevant characterizations of stiffness and function. In all, our results indicate that when athletes with leg amputations alter prosthetic model, height, and/or sagittal plane alignment, their prosthetic stiffness profiles also change; therefore variations in comfort, performance, etc. may be indirectly due to altered stiffness.

Shock absorption during transtibial amputee gait: Does longitudinal prosthetic stiffness play a role?

Reduced-stiffness components are often prescribed in lower-limb prostheses, but their efficacy in augmenting shock absorption has been inconclusive. To perform a systematic variation of longitudinal prosthetic stiffness over a wide range of values and to evaluate its effect on shock absorption during gait. Repeated-measures crossover experiment. Twelve subjects with a unilateral transtibial amputation walked at normal and fast self-selected speeds. Longitudinal prosthetic stiffness was modified by springs within a shock-absorbing pylon: normal (manufacturer recommended), 75% of normal (medium), 50% of normal (soft), and rigid (displacement blocked). The variables of interest were kinematic (stance-phase knee flexion and pelvic obliquity) and kinetic (prosthetic-side ground reaction force loading peak magnitude and timing). No changes were observed in kinematic measures during gait. A significant difference in peak ground reaction force magnitudes between medium and normal ( p = 0.001) during freely selected walking was attributed to modified walking speed ( p = 0.008). Ground reaction force peaks were found to be statistically different during fast walking, but only between isolated stiffness conditions. Thus, altering longitudinal prosthesis stiffness produced no appreciable change in gait biomechanics. Prosthesis stiffness does not appear to substantially influence shock absorption in transtibial prosthesis users. Clinical relevance Varying the level of longitudinal prosthesis stiffness did not meaningfully influence gait biomechanics at self-selected walking speeds. Thus, as currently prescribed within a transtibial prosthesis, adding longitudinal stiffness in isolation may not provide the anticipated shock absorption benefits. Further research into residual limb properties and compensatory mechanisms is needed.

Impact testing of the residual limb: System response to changes in prosthetic stiffness.

Currently, it is unknown whether changing prosthetic limb stiffness affects the total limb stiffness and influences the shock absorption of an individual with transtibial amputation. The hypotheses tested within this study are that a decrease in longitudinal prosthetic stiffness will produce (1) a reduced total limb stiffness, and (2) reduced magnitude of peak impact forces and increased time delay to peak force. Fourteen subjects with a transtibial amputation participated in this study. Prosthetic stiffness was modified by means of a shock-absorbing pylon that provides reduced longitudinal stiffness through compression of a helical spring within the pylon. A sudden loading evaluation device was built to examine changes in limb loading mechanics during a sudden impact event. No significant change was found in the peak force magnitude or timing of the peak force between prosthetic limb stiffness conditions. Total limb stiffness estimates ranged from 14.9 to 17.9 kN/m but were not significantly different between conditions. Thus, the prosthetic-side total limb stiffness was unaffected by changes in prosthetic limb stiffness. The insensitivity of the total limb stiffness to prosthetic stiffness may be explained by the mechanical characteristics (i.e., stiffness and damping) of the anatomical tissue within the residual limb.

Software Tool for the Prosthetic Foot Modeling and Stiffness Optimization

We present the procedure for the optimization of the stiffness of the prosthetic foot. The procedure allows the selection of the elements of the foot and the materials used for the design. The procedure is based on the optimization where the cost function is the minimization of the difference between the knee joint torques of healthy walking and the walking with the transfemural prosthesis. We present a simulation environment that allows the user to interactively vary the foot geometry and track the changes in the knee torque that arise from these adjustments. The software allows the estimation of the optimal prosthetic foot elasticity and geometry. We show that altering model attributes such as the length of the elastic foot segment or its elasticity leads to significant changes in the estimated knee torque required for a given trajectory.

Biomedical Signal Processing and Modeling Complexity of Living Systems

Biomedical Signal Processing and Modeling Complexity of Living Systems