Rollover shape is introduced as a significant characteristic of prosthetic feet. The rollover shapes of the Flexwalk, Quantum, SACH, and SAFE prosthetic feet were determined using three methods; two involving quasistatic loading and one dynamic loading. The results show that foot rollover shape properties obtained by quasistatic and by dynamic methods are similar.
Relationships between foot rollover shape and the alignment of transtibial prostheses are introduced that suggest ways to align transtibial prostheses without walking trials and iterations. The relationships may explain what prosthetists attempt to accomplish when they dynamically align a transtibial limb. They also explain why prosthetic feet with different mechanical properties usually necessitate different alignments, and may explain why a number of gait studies of transtibial amputees do not show major gait differences when walking is executed on various kinds of prosthetic feet.
References
1.
BarthDGSchumacherL.Sienko ThomasS. Gait analysis and energy cost of belowknee amputees wearing six different prosthetic feet. J Prosthet Orthot1992; 4(2)63–75
2.
ChildressDSSandifierAKnoxE. The influence of shoes on forefoot mechanics of prosthetic feet. The 9th Scientific Meeting of the Japanese Society of Prosthetics and Orthotics, KobeJapan, November, 5–6, 1993
3.
GitterACzernieckiJMDegrootDM. Biomechanical analysis of the influence of prosthetic feet on belowknee amputee walking. Am J Phy Med Rehabil1991; 70: 142–148
4.
HannahREMorrisonJBChapmanAE. Prostheses alignment: effect on gait of persons with belowknee amputations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1984; 65: 159–162
5.
HansenAH. Influence of prosthetic foot mechanics on alignment of transtibial prostheses. Northwestern University, USA1998, MS Thesis
6.
HansenAHChildressDSKnoxEH. Rollover shapes of prosthetic feet. Gait Posture1999; 9: 126
7.
JuM. The modelling and simulation of constrained dynamical systems with application to human gait. Case Western Reserve University, USA1986, Ph.D Thesis
8.
JuMMansourJM. Simulation of the double limb support phase of human gait. Trans Asme J Biomech Eng1988; 110: 223–229
9.
KnoxEH. The role of prosthetic feet in walking. Northwestern University, USA1996, Ph.D Thesis
10.
KoopmanHFJM. The threedimensional analysis and prediction of human walking. University of Twente, The Netherlands1989, Ph.D Thesis
11.
LehmannJFPriceRBoswellBessetteSDralleAQuestadK. Comprehensive analysis of dynamic elastic response feet: Seattle Ankle/Lite Foot versus SACH Foot. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1993; 74: 853–861
McGeerT. Passive dynamic walking. Int J Robot Res1990; 9(2)62–82
14.
MillerLAChildressDS. Analysis of a vertical compliance prosthetic foot. J Rehabil Res Dev1997; 34: 52–57
15.
MitchelsonDL. The Coda System: a brief history and current application. International Symposium on Gait Analysis, StateoftheArt of Measuring Systems and their Importance in Prosthetic and Orthotic Technology, BoenickUNaderMMainkeC.. Merke Druck and Verlag, Berlin1990; 78–85
16.
PerryJ. Gait Analysis: normal and pathological function. McGrawHill, Inc., New York1992
17.
PostemaKHermensHJde VriesJKoopmanHFJMEismaWH. Energy storage and release of prosthetic feet. Part I: biomehanical analysis related to user benefits. Prosthet Orthot Int1997; 21: 28–34
18.
PostemaKHermensHJde VriesJKoopmanHFJMEismaWH. Energy storage and release of prosthetic feet. Part II: subjective ratings of 2 energy storing and 2 conventional feet, user choice of foot and deciding factor. Prosthet Orthot Int1997; 21: 17–27
19.
PowersCMTorburnLPerryJAyyappaE. Influence of prosthetic foot design on sound limb loading in adults with unilateral belowknee amputations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1994; 75: 825–829
20.
SandifierAT. An experimental evaluation of footwear effects on the performance of energy storing prosthetic feet. Northwestern University, USA1993, MS Thesis
21.
SnyderRDPowersCMFontaineCPerryJ. The effect of five prosthetic feet on the gait and loading of the sound limb in dysvascular belowknee amputees. J Rehabil Res Dev1995; 32: 309–315
22.
SteinJLFlowersWC. Stancephase control of aboveknee prostheses: knee control versus SACH foot design. J Biomech1987; 20: 19–28
23.
TorburnLPerryJAyyappaEShanfieldSL. Belowknee amputee gait with dynamic elastic response prosthetic feet: a pilot study. J Rehabil Res Dev1990; 27: 369–384
24.
TorburnLPowersCMGuiterrezRPerryJ. Energy expenditure during ambulation in dysvascular and traumatic belowknee amputees: a comparison of five prosthetic feet. J Rehabil Res Dev1995; 32: 111–119
25.
van JaarsveldHWLGrootenboerHJde VriesJKoopmanHFJM. Stiffness and hysteresis properties of some prosthetic feet. Prosthet Orthot Int1990; 14: 117–124
26.
WinterDA. Biomechanics and control of human movement. J Wiley, Toronto1990
27.
ZahediMSSpenceWDSolomonidisSEPaulJP. Repeatability of kinetic and kinematic measurements in gait studies of the lower limb amputee. Prosthet Orthot Int1987; 11: 55–64
28.
ZahediMSSpenceWDSolomonidisSEPaulJP. Alignment of lowerlimb prostheses. J Rehabil Res Dev1986; 23(2)2–19
29.
ZahediMSSpenceWDSolomonidisSE. The influence of alignment on prosthetic gait. Amputation surgery and lower limb prosthetics, MurdochGDonovanRG. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford1988; 367–378
