Objective: To assess the effects of antero-posterior realignment of the prosthesis on pressure distribution at the stump/socket interface in unilateral transtibial amputees during unsupported stance and gait.
Intervention: Antero-posterior prosthesis realignment using 0.5 cm heel or forefoot wedging.
Measures: Pressure distribution changes at several sites at the stump/socket interface, expressed as peak pressure, peak pressure time, sustained submaximal load (MP80+) and time period of MP80+ (TP80+).
Results: During stance, heel wedging led to a 30.4% decrease in mean pressure near the patella tendon and a 40.0% increase near the distal tibia site, whereas forefoot wedging led to a 30.0% decrease in pressure in the tibial end region. Antero-posterior ankle realignment did not lead to significant changes near the fibular head. During gait only heel wedging led to a 11.5% increase in peak pressure in the tibia end region. Mean peak pressure time increased 22.7% using heel wedging and decreased 8.8% using forefoot wedging. MP80+ increased 23.8% in the tibia end region during heel wedging and 17.0% in the subpatellar region during forefoot wedging.
Conclusions: Antero-posterior realignment of the ankle joint led to an inverse loading and unloading of the subpatellar region versus tibial end region. However, results indicate that stump/socket interface pressure during stance seems not to be highly predictive as to pressure behaviour during gait. Ankle joint realignment led to significant differences in temporal sequences of tissue (un-)loading in the subpatellar area during gait.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Rommers GM. The elderly amputee. Rehabilitation and functional outcome. PhD thesis. Groningen: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 2000.
2.
Chan KM, Tan ES. Use of lower limb prosthesis among elderly amputees. Ann Acad Med Singapore1990; 19: 811–816.
3.
Sanders JE, Lam D, Dralle AJ, Okumura R. Interface pressures and shear stresses at thirteen socket sites on two persons with transtibial amputation. J Rehabil Res Dev1997; 34: 19–43.
4.
Sanders JE, Bell DM, Okumura RM, Dralle AJ. Effects of alignment changes on stance phase pressures and shear stresses on transtibial amputees: measurements from 13 transducer sites. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng1998; 6: 21–31.
5.
Sanders JE, Daly CH. Interface pressures and shear stresses: sagittal plane angular alignment effects in three transtibial amputee case studies. Prosthet Orthot Int1999; 23: 21–29.
6.
Buis AW, Convery P. Calibration problems encountered while monitoring stump/socket interface pressures with force sensing resistors: techniques adopted to minimise inaccuracies. Prosthet Orthot Int1997; 21: 179–182.
7.
Convery P, Buis AWP. Conventional PTB socket/stump interface dynamic pressure distribution during the prosthetic phase of gait of a transtibial amputee. Prosthet Orthot Int1998; 3: 12–14.
8.
Convery P, Buis AW. Socket/stump interface dynamic pressure distributions recorded during the prosthetic stance phase of gait of a transtibial amputee wearing a hydrocast socket. Prosthet Orthot Int1999; 23: 107–112.
9.
Pinzur MS, Cox W, Kaiser J, Morris T, Patwardhan A, Vrbos L. The effect of prosthetic alignment on relative limb loading in persons with transtibial amputation: a preliminary report. J Rehabil Res Dev1995; 32: 373–377.
10.
Zhang M, Turner-Smith AR, Tanner A, Roberts VC. Clinical investigation of the pressure and shear stress on the transtibial stump with a prosthesis. Med Eng Phys1998; 20: 188–198.
11.
Williams RB, Porter D, Roberts VC, Regan JF. Triaxial force transducer for investigating stresses at the stump/socket interface. Med Biol Eng Comput1992; 30: 89–96.
12.
Silver-Thorn MB, Childress DS. Parametric analysis using the finite element method to investigate prosthetic interface stresses for persons with transtibial amputation. J Rehabil Res Dev1996; 33: 227–238.
13.
Siegel S, Castellan NJ. Non-parametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1988.
