Three types of walking orthosis are currently available to enable paralysed people to achieve reciprocal gait. This case study assesses the performance in walking of one patient who was proficient in the use of all three devices. The results of a biomechanical analysis are presented in which comparisons are made between the orthoses in terms of gefieral gait parameters and movement of the lower limbs and pelvis.
References
1.
DouglasR.LarsonP. F.D'AbrosiaR.Mc CallR. E. The LSU reciprocation gait orthosis. Ortiopedics1983; 6: 834–838
2.
KirtleyC.WhittleM. W.JeffersonR. J. Influence of walking seed on gait parameters. J. Biomed. Eng.1985; 7: 282–288
3.
RoseG. K. The principles and practice of hip guidance articulations. Prosthet. Orthot. Int.1979; 3: 37–43
4.
SaundersJ. B.de InmanM. V. T.EberhardtH. D. The major determinants in normal and pathological gait. J. Bone Joint Surg.1953; 35A: 543–558
5.
StallardJ.PatrickR. E.MajorR. E. A review of the fundamental design problems of providing ambulation for paraplegic patients. Paraplegia1989; 21: 70–75
6.
ThurstonA. J.WhittleM. W.StokesI. A. F. Spinal and pelvic motion during walking—a new method of stuty. Eng. Med1982; 10: 219–222
7.
WhittleM. W. Calibration and performance of a three-dimensiona television system for kinematic analysis. J. Biomech.1982; 15: 185–196
8.
WhittleM. W. Dynamic assessment of knee joint function. Eng. Met.1986; 15: 71–75
9.
WhittleM. W.CochraneG. M. A comparative evaluation of the hip guidance orthosis (HGO) and the reciprocating gait orthosis (RGO). Health Equipment information No. 192. National Health Service Procurement Directorate., London1989
