Effects of Wearing a Powered Ankle-Foot Prosthesis on Amputee Walking

Not Applicable

Completed

Brief Summary: Amputees wearing a conventional prosthesis require 20-30% more metabolic energy to walk at the same speeds as non-amputees and this discrepancy is more apparent at faster walking speeds. Amputees choose to walk at speeds 30-40% slower than non-amputees. Preferred walking speed is likely influenced by elevated metabolic energy, but the underlying reason for slower preferred walking speeds is not fully understood. Unilateral amputees exhibit highly asymmetrical gait patterns that likely require more metabolic energy and impair functional mobility, increasing the risk of degenerative joint disease, osteo-arthritis and lower back pain. Improvements in prosthetic devices could enhance mobility in amputees, thus positively effecting rehabilitation and ambulation in veterans. A prosthesis that allows amputees to reduce metabolic energy would be especially useful for rehabilitation in older, ill individuals with reduced exercise capacities and could literally restore walking ability in people that are currently non-ambulatory.

Hypotheses. Amputees wearing the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Powered Ankle-Foot (PAF) prosthesis will have a lower metabolic cost, faster preferred walking speed, and improved gait symmetry during walking than amputees wearing a conventional prosthesis and will have nearly the same metabolic cost, preferred walking speed, and gait symmetry during walking as age, gender, height, and weight matched non-amputees.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria

20 healthy adult volunteers, 10 unilateral trans-tibial amputees and 10 matched non-amputees, will be recruited and screened
Amputees must be at least 1 year post-amputation, high-functioning (at least a K3 level of ambulation), and whose cause of amputation is either traumatic or vascular. Medicare defines a K3 level amputee as an ambulator who has the ability or potential for prosthetic ambulation with variable cadence, who has the ability to traverse most environmental barriers and who may have vocational, therapeutic, or exercise activity that demands prosthetic utilization beyond simple locomotion

Exclusion Criteria

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Prosthesis	Powered ankle-foot prosthesis	Powered ankle-foot prosthesis and passive-elastic prosthesis
Non-amputee	No device	Non-amputee

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Metabolic Cost of Transport	1 year	We measured and compared gross rates of oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production using a portable metabolic analysis system (Cosmed K4b2, IT) while participants walked at five constance velocities (0.75, 1.00, 1.25, 1.50 and 1.75 m/s) on a level treadmill (SoleFitness F85). We calculated average steady-state metabolic power in Watts (W) from 4-6 min of each trial using a standard equation. Then, we divided the metabolic power by each participant's weight and velocity to calculate the metabolic cost of transport (J/Nm).

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Trailing Leg Step-to-step Transition Work	1 year	We calculated step-to-step transition work, the work done by each individual leg on the center of mass during transitions, using the individual limbs method described by Donelan et al. 2002. Trailing leg step-to-step transition work quantifies the amount of push-off work done by the trailing leg when both feet are on the ground during walking. Work (J) is normalized to each subject's mass (kg).
Preferred Walking Velocity	1 year	We determined preferred walking velocity by incrementally increasing and decreasing treadmill velocity until each participant ascertained the velocity that they felt most comfortable.