Comparing New Prothesis PROPRIO-FOOT® Versus Usual Prothesis Tasks Tibial Amputees
Phase 4
Completed
- Conditions
- Lower Limb Amputation at Ankle (Injury)
- Registration Number
- NCT02501408
- Lead Sponsor
- University Hospital, Angers
- Brief Summary
Evaluate a new porosthetic device in lower limb amputees.
- Detailed Description
Randomisation between usual and new prosthesis Cross over study of walking performance and VO2 on treadmill with the two devices after 1 month adaptation to each system.
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- COMPLETED
- Sex
- All
- Target Recruitment
- 50
Inclusion Criteria
- Tibial amputation
- Ability top walk on treadmill
- Stable prosthesis for at least 3 months
Exclusion Criteria
- Bilateral amputation
- Cancer
- Absence of consent
Study & Design
- Study Type
- INTERVENTIONAL
- Study Design
- CROSSOVER
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method oxygen consumption 1 mois after adpatation of the selected device Measurement on treadmill
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method
Related Research Topics
Explore scientific publications, clinical data analysis, treatment approaches, and expert-compiled information related to the mechanisms and outcomes of this trial. Click any topic for comprehensive research insights.
How does the PROPRIO-FOOT® bionic prosthesis improve biomechanical efficiency compared to standard devices in tibial amputees?
What biomarkers predict better walking performance with the PROPRIO-FOOT® versus conventional prostheses in ankle-level amputees?
What are the adverse events associated with bionic prosthetic feet like PROPRIO-FOOT® in tibial amputees and their management?
How does the PROPRIO-FOOT® compare to microprocessor-controlled prostheses in terms of VO2 consumption and gait kinematics?
What biomechanical mechanisms underlie enhanced energy efficiency in tibial amputees using proprioceptive prosthetic devices?
Trial Locations
- Locations (1)
Centre hospitalier universitaire
🇫🇷Angers, France
Centre hospitalier universitaire🇫🇷Angers, France