Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Objective:

To study the influence of a transition from a non-microprocessor controlled to the Rheo Knee^® II on quality of life, balance confidence and measures of mobility.

Design:

Randomised crossover trial.

Setting:

Research department of a rehabilitation centre.

Subjects:

Persons with a transfemoral amputation or knee disarticulation (n=10).

Interventions:

Participants were assessed with their own non-microprocessor controlled knee and with the Rheo Knee^® II. The low-profile Vari-Flex with EVO foot was installed in both knee conditions, followed by eight weeks of acclimatisation. The order in which knees were tested was randomised.

Main measures:

Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire with addendum, Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale, Timed “up & go” test, Timed up and down stairs test, Hill Assessment Index, Stairs Assessment Index, Standardized Walking Obstacle Course and One Leg Balance test.

Results:

Significant higher scores were found for the Rheo Knee^® II on the Residual Limb Health subscale of the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire when compared to the non-microprocessor controlled prosthetic knee (median [interquartile range] resp. 86.67 [62.21-93.08] and 68.71 [46.15-94.83]; P=0.047) In addition, participants needed significantly more steps to complete an obstacle course when walking with the Rheo Knee^® II compared to the non-microprocessor controlled prosthetic knee (median [interquartile range] resp. 23.50 [19.92-26.25] and 22.17 [19.50-25.75]; P=0.041). On other outcome measures, no significant differences were found.

Conclusions:

Transition towards the Rheo Knee^® II had little effect on the studied outcome measures.

Keywords

Amputation prosthetics quality of life measures of mobility

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Herr

Wilkenfeld

. User-adaptive control of a magnetorheological prosthetic knee. Ind Robot 2003; 30: 42–55.

Stinus

. Biomechanik und beurteilung des mikroprozessorgesteuerten exoprothesengelenkes C-Leg. Z Orthop 2000; 138: 278–282.

Hafner

Smith

. Differences in function and safety between medical functional classification level-2 and -3 transfemoral amputees and influence of prosthetic knee joint control. J Rehab Res Dev 2009; 46: 417–434.

Hafner

Willingham

Buell

. Evaluation of function, performance and preference as transfemoral amputees transition from mechanical to microprocessor control of the prosthetic knee. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007; 88: 207–217.

Kahle

Highsmith

Hubbard

. Comparison of nonmicroprocessor knee mechanism versus C-Leg on Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire, stumbles, falls, walking tests, stair descent, and knee preference. J Rehabil Res Dev 2008; 45: 1–14.

Kaufman

Levine

Brey

. Energy expenditure and activity of transfemoral amputees using mechanical and microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008; 89: 1380–1385.

Theeven

PJR

Hemmen

Geers

RPJ

. Influence of advanced prosthetic knee joints on perceibed performance and everyday life activity level of low functional persons with a transfemoral amputation or knee disarticulation. J Rehabil Med 2012; 44: 454–461.

Burnfield

Eberly

Gronely

. Impact of stance phase microprocessor-controlled knee prosthesis on ramp negotiation and community walking function in K2 level transfemoral amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int 2012; 36: 95–104.

Highsmith

Kahle

Miro

. Ramp descent performance with the C-Leg and interrater reliability of the Hill Assessment Index. Prosthet Orthot Int 2013; 37: 362–368.

10.

Meier

Hansen

Gard

. Obstacle course: Users’ maneuverability and movement efficiency when using Otto Bock C-Leg, Otto Bock 3R60, and CaTech SNS prosthetic knee joints. J Rehab Res Dev 2012; 49: 583–596.

11.

Seymour

Engbretson

Kott

. Comparison between the C-leg microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee and non-microprocessor control prosthetic knees: A preliminary study of energy expenditure, obstacle course performance, and quality of life survey. Prosthet Orthot Int 2007; 31: 51–61.

12.

Klute

Berge

Orendurff

. Prosthetic intervention effects on activity of lower-extremity amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87: 717–722.

13.

Johansson

Sherrill

Riley

. A clinical comparison of variable-damping and mechanically passive prosthetic knee devices. Am J Phys Med Rehab 2005; 84: 563–575.

14.

Bellmann

Schmalz

Blumentritt

. Comparative biomechanical analysis of current microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee joints. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91: 644–652.

15.

Segal

Orendurff

Klute

. Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg and Mauch SNS prosthetic knees. J Rehab Res Dev 2006; 43: 857–870.

16.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. US Department of Health and Human Services. HFCA Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS). Springfield (VA): US Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service, 2001.

17.

Legro

Reiber

Smith

. Prosthetic evaluation questionnaire for persons with lower limb amputation: assessing prosthetic-related quality of life. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998; 79: 931–938.

18.

Resnik

Borgia

. Reliability of outcome measures for people with lower-limb amputations: distinguishing true change from statistical error. Phys Ther 2011; 91: 555–565.

19.

Powell

Myers

. The activities-specific balance confidence (ABC) scale. J Gerontol A Biol Med Sci 1995; 50: M28–M34.

20.

Miller

Deathe

Speechley

. Psychometric properties of the activities-specific balance confidence scale among individuals with a lower-limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 84: 656–661.

21.

Vrieling

van Keeken

Schoppen

. Obstacle crossing in lower limb amputees. Gait Posture 2007; 26: 587–594.

22.

Podsiadlo

Richardson

. The timed “up and go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991; 39: 142–148.

23.

Schoppen

Boonstra

Groothoff

. The timed “up and go” test: reliability and validity in persons with unilateral lower limb amputations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 825–828.

24.

Zaino

Gocha Marchese

Westcott

. Timed up and down stairs test: preliminary reliability and validity of a new measure of functional mobility. Pediatr Phys Ther 2004; 16: 90–98.

25.

Buell

Willingham

Allyn

. (eds). Evaluation of gait style to ascend and descent stairs for lower limb amputees. Proceedings of the 11th World Congres of the International Society of Prosthetics and Orthotics; 2004 Aug 1–6, Hong Kong.

26.

Buell

Willingham

Allyn

. (eds). Evaluation of gait style for hill descent for lower limb amputees. Proceedings of the 11th World Congress of the International Society of Prosthetics and Orthotics; 2004 Aug 1–6, Hong Kong.

27.

Taylor

Gunther

. Standardized walking obstacle course: preliminary reliability and validity of a functional measurement tool. J Rehabil Outcomes Meas 1998; 2: 15–25.

28.

Bohannon

. One-leg balance test times. Percept Mot Skills 1994; 78: 801–802.

29.

Meulenbelt

Geertzen

Jonkman

. Skin problems of the stump in lower-limb amputees: 2. Influence on functioning in daily life. Acta Derm Venereol 2011; 91: 178–182.

30.

Deathe

Miller

. The L test of functional mobility: measurement properties of a modified version of the timed “up & go” test designed for people with lower-limb amputations. Phys Ther 2005; 85: 626–635.

31.

Sjödahl

Jarnlo

Söderberg

. Kinematic and kinetic gait analysis in the sagittal plane of transfemoral amputees before and after special gait re-education. Prosthet Orthot Int 2002; 26: 101–112.

32.

English

Hubbard

McElroy

. Establishment of consistent gait after fitting of new components. J Rehab Res Dev 1995; 32: 32–35.

33.

Parker

Kirby

Adderson

. Ambulation of people with lower-limb amputations: relationship between capacity and performance mesures. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010; 91: 543–549.

Influence of a user-adaptive prosthetic knee on quality of life,balance confidence,and measures of mobility: a randomised cross-over trial

Abstract

Objective:

Design:

Setting:

Subjects:

Interventions:

Main measures:

Results:

Conclusions:

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References