Open Journal Systems

Kinematic and kinetic analysis of transfemoral prosthesis

Leonardo Broche-Vázquez, Roberto Sagaró-Zamora, Claudia Ochoa-Díaz, Antonio Padilha-Lanari-Bó, Félix A. Martinez-Nariño

Article ID: 1658
Vol 3, Issue 1, 2022

VIEWS - 252 (Abstract)

Abstract

The feasibility of using transfemoral prosthesis Otto bock with 3R80 knee and articulated ankle1C30 “Trias” was analyzed from the perspective of dynamics and clinic. The kinematic and kinetic study of gait were performed on 5 amputated volunteers and 5 controls using videography techniques and force platform. Kinetic asymmetry gait is one of the main causes of hip joint degeneration. Combining kinematic and kinetic variables, we can draw important conclusions related to the dynamic imbalance of the main causes of hip degenerative diseases through the clinical trials of radiography film and density measurement, which has become an important tool to evaluate the feasibility of prosthetic design.

Keywords

transfemoral prosthesis; kinetics; osteoporosis; osteoarthritis

Full Text:

PDF

References

1. Lemaire ED, Fisher FR. Osteoarthritis and elderly amputee gait. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1994; 75(10): 1094–1099.

2. Morgenroth DC, Segal AD, Zelik KE, et al. The effect of prosthetic foot push-off on mechanical loading associated with knee osteoarthritis in lower extremity amputees. Gait & Posture 2011; 34(4): 502–507.

3. Gailey R, Allen K, Castles J, et al. Review of secondary physical conditions associated with lower-limb amputation and long-term prosthesis use. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development 2008; 45(1):15–30.

4. Kulkarni J, Adams J, Thomas E, et al. Association between amputation, arthritis and osteopenia in British male war veterans with major lower limb amputations. Clinical Rehabilitation 1998; 12(4): 348–353.

5. Silverman AK, Neptune RR. Three-dimensional knee joint contact forces during walking in unilateral transtibial amputees. Journal of Biomechanics 2014; 47(11): 2556–2562.

6. Farahmand F, Rezaeian T, Narimani R, et al. Kinematic and dynamic analysis of gait cycle of above-knee amputees. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology 2006; 13(3): 261–71.

7. Sherk VD, Bemben MG, Bemben DA. BMD and bone geometry in transtibial and transfemoral amputees. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research 2008; 23(9): 1449–1457.

8. Olivares A, Broche L, Novo CD, et al. Analysis of the functionality of transfemoral orthopedic prostheses. Revistacubana de Ortopedia y Traumatología 2011; 25(2): 102–116.

9. Kaufman KR, Frittoli S, Frigo CA. Gait asymmetry of transfemoral amputees using mechanical and microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees. Clinical Biomechanics 2012; 27(5): 460–465.

10. Grabowski AMD, Andrea S. Effect of a powered ankle foot prosthesis on kinetic loading of the unaffected legs during level-ground walking. Journal of Neuro Engineering and Rehabilitation 2013; 10(49):1–11.

11. Bae TS, Choi K, Hong D, et al. Dynamic analysis of above-knee amputee gait. Clinical Biomechanics 2007; 22(5): 557–566.

12. Nolan L, Wit A, Dudziñski K, et al. Adjustments in gait symmetry with walking speed in transfemoral and trans-tibial amputees. Gait & Posture 2003; 17(2): 142–151.

13. Segal AD, Orendurff MS, Klute GK, et al. Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg and Mauch SNS prosthetic knees. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development 2006; 43(7): 857.

14. Lacroix D, Patiño J. Finite element analysis of donning procedure of a prosthetic transfemoral socket. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 2011; 39(12): 2972–2983.

15. Jia X, Zhang M, Lee WCC. Load transfer mechanics between trans-tibial prosthetic socket and residual limb-dynamic effects. Journal of Biomechanics 2004; 37(9): 1371–1377.

16. Faustini MC, Neptune RR, Crawford RH. The quasi-static response of compliant prosthetic sockets for transtibial amputees using finite element methods. Medical Engineering & Physics 2006; 28(2): 114–121.

17. Rietman JS, Postema K, Geertzen JHB. Gait analysis in prosthetics: Opinions, ideas and conclusions. Prosthetics and Orthotics International 2002; 26(1): 50–57.

18. Royer T, Koenig M. Joint loading and bone mineral density in persons with unilateral, trans-tibial amputation. Clinical Biomechanics 2005; 20(10): 1119–1125.

19. Cointry G, Capozza R, Ferretti JL, et al. Towards an anthropometric diagnosis of osteopenias and a biomechanical diagnosis of osteoporosis. Medicina (Buenos Aires) 2003; 63(6): 737–747.

20. Kadaba MP, Ramakrishnan HK, Wootten ME. Measurement of lower extremity kinematics during level walking. Journal of Orthopaedic Research 1990; 8(3): 383–392.

21. Kadaba MP, Ramakrishnan HK, Wootten ME. On the estimation of joint kinematics during gait. Journal of Biomechanics 1991; 24(10): 969–977.

22. QTM. Qualisys User Manual. Motion Capture System. Gothenburg, Sweden: Quality; 2009.

23. Neumann D. Kinesiology of the musculoskeletal system. Wisconsin: Mosby Company; 2002.

24. Ross J, Gamble J. Human walking. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Williams and Wilkins; 2006.

25. Winter DA. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. 4th ed. Ontario, Canada: John Wiley & Sons; 2009.

26. Leib E, Lewiecki EM, Binkley N, et al. Official positions of the international society for clinical densitometry. Journal of Clinical Densitometry 2004; 7(1): 1–5.

27. Broche L, Torres M, Novo CD, et al. Influence of gait asymmetry on the biomechanical behavior of hip joints in patients with transfemoral prostheses. Ingeniare. 2015; 23(2): 312–322.

28. Schaarschmidt M, Lipfert SW, Meier-Gratz C, et al. Functional gait asymmetry of unilateral transfemoral amputees. Human Movement Science 2012; 31(4): 907–917.

29. Smith JD, Martin PE. Effects of prosthetic mass distribution on metabolic costs and walking symmetry. Journal of Applied Biomechanics 2013; 29(3): 317–328.

30. Miyares AO, Zamora RS, Martinez CR, et al. Comprehensive proposal for the evaluation of transfemoral prosthetic devices. Ingenierías 2010;13 (47).

31. Unal R, Carloni R, Hekman EEG, et al. (editors). Biomechanical Conceptual Design of a Passive Transfemoral Artery Prosthesis. 32nd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Buenos Aires: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; 2010. p. 515–518. Available at: http://doc.utwente.nl/74774/1/05626020.pdf.

32. Johansson JL, Sherrill DM, Riley PO, et al. A clinical comparison of variable-damping and mechanically passive prosthetic knee devices. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation 2005; 84(8): 563–575.

33. Vallery H, Burgkart R, Riener R, et al. Complementary limb motion estimation for the control of active knee prostheses. Biomedical Engineering 2011; 56(1): 45–51.

34. Burke J, Roman V, Wright V. Bone and joint changes in lower limb amputees. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 1978; 37(3): 252–254.

35. Struyf PA, Heugten CM, Hitters MW, et al. The prevalence of osteoarthritis of the intact hip and knee among traumatic leg amputees. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2009; 90(3): 440–6.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.54517/wt.v3i1.1658
(252 Abstract Views, 0 PDF Downloads)