This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Datta, D. Articles by Howitt, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Datta, D. Articles by Howitt, J. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Amputees Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A comparative evaluation of oxygen consumption and gait pattern in amputees using Intelligent Prostheses and conventionally damped knee swing-phase control

Mobility and Specialised Rehabilitation Centre, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, UK

Ben Heller

Medical Physics and Clinical Engineering, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK

John Howitt

Mobility and Specialised Rehabilitation Centre, Northern General Hospital, Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Sheffield, UK

Objective: To compare the gait of amputees wearing conventionally damped pneumatic swing-phase control knees and microchip-controlled Intelligent Prostheses.

Design: Crossover trial.

Setting: An amputee rehabilitation centre in a teaching hospital.

Participants: Ten established unilateral transfemoral prosthetic users were asked to participate in the trial; all agreed.

Interventions: The amputees were assessed wearing pneumatic swing-phase control knees and then with the Intelligent Prosthesis.

Main outcome measures: Oxygen consumption while walking at different speeds on a treadmill, video-recording of gait assessed by a panel and temporal–spatial parameters of gait whilst walking at slow, fast or normal speeds in a gait laboratory.

Results: Mean oxygen cost for all subjects at 0.69 m/s was 0.33 ml/kg.m with the conventional limb and 0.30 ml/kg.m with the Intelligent Prosthesis (p–0.01). At 1.25 m/s the mean oxygen cost for the conventional limb was 0.24 ml/kg.m and for the Intelligent Prosthesis was 0.22 ml/kg.m (not significant). The ANOVA analysis showed that oxygen cost was similar at normal walking speeds but increased more at lower speeds for the pneumatic swing-phase control leg compared to the Intelligent Prosthesis (p<0.02). There were no significant differences in subjective gait evaluation or temporal and spatial gait parameters.

Conclusion: At lower speeds oxygen cost was lower with the Intelligent Prosthesis. Gait analysis detected no significant changes between the two legs.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 19, No. 4, 398-403 (2005)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215505cr805oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. Rubenson and R. L. Marsh Mechanical efficiency of limb swing during walking and running in guinea fowl (Numida meleagris) J Appl Physiol, May 1, 2009; 106(5): 1618 - 1630. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. R.T. Nelson, M. Bey, D. P. Fyhrie, and P. E. Di Cesare On the Horizon From the ORS J. Am. Acad. Ortho. Surg., April 1, 2008; 16(4): 237 - 240. [Full Text] [PDF]