Comparison between SACH foot and a new multiaxial prosthetic foot during walking in hypomobile transtibial amputees: Physiological responses and functional assessment

Anna S. Delussu, Francesco Paradisi, Stefano Brunelli, Roberto Pellegrini, Daniele Zenardi, Marco Traballesi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The most prescribed prosthetic foot for hypomobile transtibial amputees (TTAs) is the solid ankle cushion heel (SACH). Recently, the new 1M10 Adjust (Ottobock, Duderstadt, Germany) has been designed for hypomobile TTAs. No studies are available about the physiological responses to walking with 1M10 Adjust or about the related energy cost of walking (ECW). The aim of this study was to assess physiological responses to walking with 1M10 Adjust and with SACH in low-mobility TTAs and their ECW, and to compare 1M10 Adjust and SACH for physiological responses, ECW, relative perceived effort and satisfaction (SATPRO) using the prosthesis. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: The study was conducted in the outpatient rehabilitation unit of a rehabilitation center. POPULATION: Twenty hypomobile unilateral TTAs were enrolled. Amputees who ranged K-levels 1 or 2 were defined. METHODS: TTAs performed two over ground walking tests in two separate days, with an interval time in between of 30 days. TTAs performed the first walking test wearing their habitual SACH foot; the second walking test fitting the 1M10 Adjust, after 30 days of its use. During walking tests, TTAs walked back and forth for 6 minutes at self-selected walking speed (SSWS) and physiological data were collected. At the end of each walking test, the relative perceived effort was assessed by Borg scale. Finally, SATPRO questionnaire was administered. RESULTS: Twenty TTAs (17 males) were enrolled (mean age, body mass and height were 66.6±6.7 years, 78.5±13.2 kg, and 168.5±7.5 cm, respectively): 19 had a K-level 2 and one had a K-level 1. Physiological responses using SACH or 1M10 Adjust foot did not show statistical differences. ECW, SSWS and relative perceived effort significantly improved using the 1M10 Adjust. Satisfaction with 1M10 Adjust was significantly greater than with SACH. CONCLUSIONS: TTAs showed a significant improvement in ECW, relative perceived effort and SATPRO with 1M10 Adjust than with SACH. This suggests that 1M10 Adjust foot could be a good choice for hypomobile TTAs. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: The better prosthetic performance provided by 1M10 Adjust foot during gait could improve mobility in TTAs with low mobility contributing to prevent comorbidity deriving from sedentary lifestyle. With its long-term benefits, 1M10 Adjust could contribute to a better quality of life.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)304-309
Number of pages6
JournalEuropean Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine
Volume52
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1 2016

Fingerprint

Amputees
Heel
Ankle
Walking
Foot
Costs and Cost Analysis
Rehabilitation
Sedentary Lifestyle
Rehabilitation Centers
Body Height
Gait
Prostheses and Implants
Observational Studies
Germany
Comorbidity
Outpatients

Keywords

  • Amputees
  • Artificial limbs
  • Energy expenditure
  • Gait
  • Oxygen consumption
  • Prostheses and implants

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation
  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

Comparison between SACH foot and a new multiaxial prosthetic foot during walking in hypomobile transtibial amputees : Physiological responses and functional assessment. / Delussu, Anna S.; Paradisi, Francesco; Brunelli, Stefano; Pellegrini, Roberto; Zenardi, Daniele; Traballesi, Marco.

In: European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Vol. 52, No. 3, 01.06.2016, p. 304-309.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f13d8b1bb0ee43299215bb652e8835f8,
title = "Comparison between SACH foot and a new multiaxial prosthetic foot during walking in hypomobile transtibial amputees: Physiological responses and functional assessment",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: The most prescribed prosthetic foot for hypomobile transtibial amputees (TTAs) is the solid ankle cushion heel (SACH). Recently, the new 1M10 Adjust (Ottobock, Duderstadt, Germany) has been designed for hypomobile TTAs. No studies are available about the physiological responses to walking with 1M10 Adjust or about the related energy cost of walking (ECW). The aim of this study was to assess physiological responses to walking with 1M10 Adjust and with SACH in low-mobility TTAs and their ECW, and to compare 1M10 Adjust and SACH for physiological responses, ECW, relative perceived effort and satisfaction (SATPRO) using the prosthesis. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: The study was conducted in the outpatient rehabilitation unit of a rehabilitation center. POPULATION: Twenty hypomobile unilateral TTAs were enrolled. Amputees who ranged K-levels 1 or 2 were defined. METHODS: TTAs performed two over ground walking tests in two separate days, with an interval time in between of 30 days. TTAs performed the first walking test wearing their habitual SACH foot; the second walking test fitting the 1M10 Adjust, after 30 days of its use. During walking tests, TTAs walked back and forth for 6 minutes at self-selected walking speed (SSWS) and physiological data were collected. At the end of each walking test, the relative perceived effort was assessed by Borg scale. Finally, SATPRO questionnaire was administered. RESULTS: Twenty TTAs (17 males) were enrolled (mean age, body mass and height were 66.6±6.7 years, 78.5±13.2 kg, and 168.5±7.5 cm, respectively): 19 had a K-level 2 and one had a K-level 1. Physiological responses using SACH or 1M10 Adjust foot did not show statistical differences. ECW, SSWS and relative perceived effort significantly improved using the 1M10 Adjust. Satisfaction with 1M10 Adjust was significantly greater than with SACH. CONCLUSIONS: TTAs showed a significant improvement in ECW, relative perceived effort and SATPRO with 1M10 Adjust than with SACH. This suggests that 1M10 Adjust foot could be a good choice for hypomobile TTAs. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: The better prosthetic performance provided by 1M10 Adjust foot during gait could improve mobility in TTAs with low mobility contributing to prevent comorbidity deriving from sedentary lifestyle. With its long-term benefits, 1M10 Adjust could contribute to a better quality of life.",
keywords = "Amputees, Artificial limbs, Energy expenditure, Gait, Oxygen consumption, Prostheses and implants",
author = "Delussu, {Anna S.} and Francesco Paradisi and Stefano Brunelli and Roberto Pellegrini and Daniele Zenardi and Marco Traballesi",
year = "2016",
month = "6",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "52",
pages = "304--309",
journal = "European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine",
issn = "1973-9087",
publisher = "Edizioni Minerva Medica S.p.A.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison between SACH foot and a new multiaxial prosthetic foot during walking in hypomobile transtibial amputees

T2 - Physiological responses and functional assessment

AU - Delussu, Anna S.

AU - Paradisi, Francesco

AU - Brunelli, Stefano

AU - Pellegrini, Roberto

AU - Zenardi, Daniele

AU - Traballesi, Marco

PY - 2016/6/1

Y1 - 2016/6/1

N2 - BACKGROUND: The most prescribed prosthetic foot for hypomobile transtibial amputees (TTAs) is the solid ankle cushion heel (SACH). Recently, the new 1M10 Adjust (Ottobock, Duderstadt, Germany) has been designed for hypomobile TTAs. No studies are available about the physiological responses to walking with 1M10 Adjust or about the related energy cost of walking (ECW). The aim of this study was to assess physiological responses to walking with 1M10 Adjust and with SACH in low-mobility TTAs and their ECW, and to compare 1M10 Adjust and SACH for physiological responses, ECW, relative perceived effort and satisfaction (SATPRO) using the prosthesis. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: The study was conducted in the outpatient rehabilitation unit of a rehabilitation center. POPULATION: Twenty hypomobile unilateral TTAs were enrolled. Amputees who ranged K-levels 1 or 2 were defined. METHODS: TTAs performed two over ground walking tests in two separate days, with an interval time in between of 30 days. TTAs performed the first walking test wearing their habitual SACH foot; the second walking test fitting the 1M10 Adjust, after 30 days of its use. During walking tests, TTAs walked back and forth for 6 minutes at self-selected walking speed (SSWS) and physiological data were collected. At the end of each walking test, the relative perceived effort was assessed by Borg scale. Finally, SATPRO questionnaire was administered. RESULTS: Twenty TTAs (17 males) were enrolled (mean age, body mass and height were 66.6±6.7 years, 78.5±13.2 kg, and 168.5±7.5 cm, respectively): 19 had a K-level 2 and one had a K-level 1. Physiological responses using SACH or 1M10 Adjust foot did not show statistical differences. ECW, SSWS and relative perceived effort significantly improved using the 1M10 Adjust. Satisfaction with 1M10 Adjust was significantly greater than with SACH. CONCLUSIONS: TTAs showed a significant improvement in ECW, relative perceived effort and SATPRO with 1M10 Adjust than with SACH. This suggests that 1M10 Adjust foot could be a good choice for hypomobile TTAs. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: The better prosthetic performance provided by 1M10 Adjust foot during gait could improve mobility in TTAs with low mobility contributing to prevent comorbidity deriving from sedentary lifestyle. With its long-term benefits, 1M10 Adjust could contribute to a better quality of life.

AB - BACKGROUND: The most prescribed prosthetic foot for hypomobile transtibial amputees (TTAs) is the solid ankle cushion heel (SACH). Recently, the new 1M10 Adjust (Ottobock, Duderstadt, Germany) has been designed for hypomobile TTAs. No studies are available about the physiological responses to walking with 1M10 Adjust or about the related energy cost of walking (ECW). The aim of this study was to assess physiological responses to walking with 1M10 Adjust and with SACH in low-mobility TTAs and their ECW, and to compare 1M10 Adjust and SACH for physiological responses, ECW, relative perceived effort and satisfaction (SATPRO) using the prosthesis. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: The study was conducted in the outpatient rehabilitation unit of a rehabilitation center. POPULATION: Twenty hypomobile unilateral TTAs were enrolled. Amputees who ranged K-levels 1 or 2 were defined. METHODS: TTAs performed two over ground walking tests in two separate days, with an interval time in between of 30 days. TTAs performed the first walking test wearing their habitual SACH foot; the second walking test fitting the 1M10 Adjust, after 30 days of its use. During walking tests, TTAs walked back and forth for 6 minutes at self-selected walking speed (SSWS) and physiological data were collected. At the end of each walking test, the relative perceived effort was assessed by Borg scale. Finally, SATPRO questionnaire was administered. RESULTS: Twenty TTAs (17 males) were enrolled (mean age, body mass and height were 66.6±6.7 years, 78.5±13.2 kg, and 168.5±7.5 cm, respectively): 19 had a K-level 2 and one had a K-level 1. Physiological responses using SACH or 1M10 Adjust foot did not show statistical differences. ECW, SSWS and relative perceived effort significantly improved using the 1M10 Adjust. Satisfaction with 1M10 Adjust was significantly greater than with SACH. CONCLUSIONS: TTAs showed a significant improvement in ECW, relative perceived effort and SATPRO with 1M10 Adjust than with SACH. This suggests that 1M10 Adjust foot could be a good choice for hypomobile TTAs. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: The better prosthetic performance provided by 1M10 Adjust foot during gait could improve mobility in TTAs with low mobility contributing to prevent comorbidity deriving from sedentary lifestyle. With its long-term benefits, 1M10 Adjust could contribute to a better quality of life.

KW - Amputees

KW - Artificial limbs

KW - Energy expenditure

KW - Gait

KW - Oxygen consumption

KW - Prostheses and implants

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84978151053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84978151053&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84978151053

VL - 52

SP - 304

EP - 309

JO - European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine

JF - European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine

SN - 1973-9087

IS - 3

ER -