An experimental method was developed to determine the effects of prosthetic ankle mobility in the sagittal plane on the gaits of transfemoral amputees wearing a stance and swing (SNS) phase controlled knee prosthesis. Specially designed ankles with different ranges of motion in the sagittal plane were applied to rigid foot prostheses in order to exclude possible foot—ankle system interactions. The developed method was examined on even ground with five male transfemoral amputees wearing a SNS knee. The relative knee flexion—extension angles (defined as differences between maximum and minimum knee flexion angles) between initial contact and opposite initial contact were used to obtain changes in impact energy absorption in SNS knees in the early stance phase for two different ranges of ankle motion in the sagittal plane. Notable changes in relative knee flexion—extension angles were observed for the no-motion ankles, but no change in relative knee flexion—extension angles was observed for the maximum-motion ankles. Therefore, it is possible that sagittal mobility of a foot—ankle system is an important factor for inducing early flexion—extension movement of the knee in the stance phase of gait of transfemoral amputees wearing a SNS knee.
StokosaJ.‘The prosthetic Rx is outdated.’ In Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Pacific Rim Conference on Prosthetics and orthotics, Maui, Hawaii, USA, 20–24 January 2004 (INTERBOR, International Association of Orthotists and ProsthetistsKontich, Belgium).
2.
ZahediS.‘The results of the field trial of the Endolite Intelligent Prosthesis.’ In Proceedings of the XII International Congress of INTERBOR, Lisbon, Portugal, 22–25 September 1993 (U.S. National Member Society of the International Society for Prosthetics and OrthodonticsDublin, Ohio).
3.
DattaD.HowittJ.‘Conventional versus microchip controlled pneumatic swing phase control for trans-femoral amputees: User's verdict.’Prosthetics Orthotics Int.22 (1998): 129–135
4.
TaylorM. B.ClarkE.OffordE. A.BaxterC.‘A comparison of energy expenditure by a high level trans-femoral amputee using the intelligent prosthesis and conventionally damped prosthetic limbs.’Prosthetics Orthotics Int.20 (1996): 116–121
5.
BuckleyJ. G.SpenceW. D.SolomonidisS. E.‘Energy cost of walking: Comparison of ‘intelligent prosthesis’ with conventional mechanism.’Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil.78 (1997): 330–333
6.
ChinT.SawamuraS.ShibaR.OyabuH.NagakuraY.TakaseI.MachidaK.NakagawaA.‘Effect of an intelligent prosthesis (IP) on the walking ability of young transfemoral amputees: Comparison of IP users with able-bodied people.’Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil.82 (2003): 447–451
7.
DattaD.HellerB.HowittJ.‘A comparative evaluation of oxygen consumption and gait pattern in amputees using intelligent prostheses and conventionally damped knee swing-phase control.’Clin. Rehabil.19 (2005): 398–403
8.
ChinT.SawamuraS.ShibaR.OyabuH.NagakuraY.NakagawaA.‘Energy expenditure during walking in amputees after disarticulation of the hip. A microprocessor-controlled swing-phase control knee versus a mechanical-controlled stance-phase control knee.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Br.87 (2005): 117–119
9.
SaundersJ. B. M.InmanV. T.EberhaardtH. D.‘The major determinants in normal and pathological gait.’J. Bone Jt Surg. Am.35 (1953): 543–558
10.
MauchH. A.‘Stance control for above-knee artificial legs-design considerations in the S-N-S knee.’Bull. Prosthetics Res.10 (1968): 61–72
11.
BlumentrittS.SchererH. W.WellershausU.MichaelJ. W.‘Design principles, biomechanical data and clinical experience with a polycentric knee offering controlled stance phase knee flexion: A preliminary report.’J. Prosthetics Orthotics9 (1997): 18–24
12.
BlumentrittS.SchererH. W.MichaelJ. W.SchmalzT.‘Transfemoral amputees walking on a rotary hydraulic prosthetic knee mechanism: A preliminary report.’J. Prosthetics Orthotics10 (1998): 61–78
13.
SchmalzT.BlumentrittS.JaraschR.‘Energy expenditure and biomechanical characteristics of lower limb amputee gait: The influence of prosthetic alignment and different prosthetic components.’Gait Posture16 (2002): 255–63
14.
ChinT.MachidaK.SawamuraS.ShibaR.OyabuH.NagakuraY.TakaseI.NakagawaA.‘Comparison of different microprocessor controlled knee joints on the energy consumption during walking in trans-femoral amputees: Intelligent knee prosthesis (IP) versus C-Leg.’Prosthetics Orthotics Int.3 (2006): 73–80
15.
OrendurffM. S.SegalA. D.KluteG. K.McDowellM. L.PecoraroJ. A.CzernieckiJ. M.‘Gait efficiency using the C-Leg.’J. Rehabil. Res. Dev.43 (2006): 239–46
16.
SeymourR.EngbretsonB.KottK.OrdwayN.BrooksG.CrannellJ.HickernellE.WheelerK.‘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.’Prosthetics Orthotics Int.31 (2007): 51–61
17.
PerryJ.BurnfieldJ. M.NewsamC. J.ConleyP.‘Energy expenditure and gait characteristics of a bilateral amputee walking with C-Leg prostheses compared with stubby and conventional articulating prostheses.’Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil.85 (2004): 1711–1717
18.
JohanssonJ. L.SherrillD. M.RileyP. O.BonatoP.HerrH.‘A clinical comparison of variable-damping and mechanically passive prosthetic knee devices.’Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil.84 (2005): 563–575
19.
SegalA. D.OrendurffM. S.KluteG. K.McDowellM. L.PecoraroJ. A.ShoferJ.CzernieckiJ. M.‘Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg and Mauch SNS prosthetic knees.’J. Rehabil. Res. Dev.43 (2006): 857–870
20.
KaufmanK. R.LevineJ. A.BreyR. H.IversonB. K.McCradyS. K.PadgettD. J.JoynerM. J.‘Gait and balance of transfemoral amputees using passive mechanical and microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees.’Gait Posture26 (2007): 489–493
21.
BowkerJ. H.MichaelJ. W.Atlas of limb prosthesis: surgical, prosthetics, and rehabilitation principles (American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Mosby Year Book Inc.1992)
22.
O'ConnorC. M.ThorpeS. K.O'MalleyM. J.VaughanC. L.‘Automatic detection of gait events using kinematic data.’Gait Posture25 (2007): 469–474
23.
WhittleM. W.Gait analysis: an introduction (Butterworth—Heinemann2002)
24.
SteidelR. F.An introduction to mechanical vibrations, 2nd edition (John Wiley1979)
25.
WinterD. A.EngJ. J.IshacM. G.‘A review of kinetic parameters in human walking.’ In The book of the gait analysis: theory and application (Eds CraikR. L.OatisC. A.), 1995, pp. 252–270 (Mosby-Year Book, Inc.St Louis, Missouri).
26.
PandyM. G.BermeN.‘A general recursive technique for formulating mathematical models of human gait: Theory and application.’ In The book of biomechanics of human movement: applications in rehabilitation, sports and ergonomics (Eds BermeN.CappozzoA.), 1990, pp. 324–333 (Bertec CorporationWorthington, Ohio).
