Factors leading to falls in transfemoral prosthesis users: a case series of prosthesis-side stumble recovery responses.

IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-07-13 DOI:10.1186/s12984-024-01402-0
Shane T King, Maura E Eveld, Karl E Zelik, Michael Goldfarb
{"title":"Factors leading to falls in transfemoral prosthesis users: a case series of prosthesis-side stumble recovery responses.","authors":"Shane T King, Maura E Eveld, Karl E Zelik, Michael Goldfarb","doi":"10.1186/s12984-024-01402-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Falls due to stumbling are prevalent for transfemoral prosthesis users and may lead to increased injury risk. This preliminary case series analyzes the transfemoral prosthesis user stumble recovery response to highlight key deficits in current commercially-available prostheses and proposes potential interventions to improve recovery outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Six transfemoral prosthesis users were perturbed on their prosthetic limb at least three times while walking on a treadmill using obstacle perturbations in early, mid and late swing. Kinematic data were collected to characterize the response, while fall rate and key kinematic recovery metrics were used to assess the quality of recovery and highlight functional deficits in current commercially-available prostheses.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across all participants, 13 (54%) of the 24 trials resulted in a fall (defined as > 50% body-weight support) with all but one participant (83%) falling at least once and two participants (33%) falling every time. In contrast, in a previous study of seven young, unimpaired, non-prosthesis users using the same experimental apparatus, no falls occurred across 190 trials. For the transfemoral prosthesis users, early swing had the highest rate of falling at 64%, followed by mid-swing at 57%, and then late swing at 33%. The trend in falls was mirrored by the kinematic recovery metrics (peak trunk angle, peak trunk angular velocity, forward reach of the perturbed limb, and knee angle at ground contact). In early swing all four metrics were deficient compared to non-prosthesis user controls. In mid swing, all but trunk angular velocity were deficient. In late swing only forward reach was deficient.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on the stumble recovery responses, four potential deficiencies were identified in the response of the knee prostheses: (1) insufficient resistance to stance knee flexion upon ground contact; (2) insufficient swing extension after a perturbation; (3) difficulty initiating swing flexion following a perturbation; and (4) excessive impedance against swing flexion in early swing preventing the potential utilization of the elevating strategy. Each of these issues can potentially be addressed by mechanical or mechatronic changes to prosthetic design to improve quality of recovery and reduce the likelihood a fall.</p>","PeriodicalId":16384,"journal":{"name":"Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation","volume":"21 1","pages":"117"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11245817/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-024-01402-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Falls due to stumbling are prevalent for transfemoral prosthesis users and may lead to increased injury risk. This preliminary case series analyzes the transfemoral prosthesis user stumble recovery response to highlight key deficits in current commercially-available prostheses and proposes potential interventions to improve recovery outcomes.

Methods: Six transfemoral prosthesis users were perturbed on their prosthetic limb at least three times while walking on a treadmill using obstacle perturbations in early, mid and late swing. Kinematic data were collected to characterize the response, while fall rate and key kinematic recovery metrics were used to assess the quality of recovery and highlight functional deficits in current commercially-available prostheses.

Results: Across all participants, 13 (54%) of the 24 trials resulted in a fall (defined as > 50% body-weight support) with all but one participant (83%) falling at least once and two participants (33%) falling every time. In contrast, in a previous study of seven young, unimpaired, non-prosthesis users using the same experimental apparatus, no falls occurred across 190 trials. For the transfemoral prosthesis users, early swing had the highest rate of falling at 64%, followed by mid-swing at 57%, and then late swing at 33%. The trend in falls was mirrored by the kinematic recovery metrics (peak trunk angle, peak trunk angular velocity, forward reach of the perturbed limb, and knee angle at ground contact). In early swing all four metrics were deficient compared to non-prosthesis user controls. In mid swing, all but trunk angular velocity were deficient. In late swing only forward reach was deficient.

Conclusion: Based on the stumble recovery responses, four potential deficiencies were identified in the response of the knee prostheses: (1) insufficient resistance to stance knee flexion upon ground contact; (2) insufficient swing extension after a perturbation; (3) difficulty initiating swing flexion following a perturbation; and (4) excessive impedance against swing flexion in early swing preventing the potential utilization of the elevating strategy. Each of these issues can potentially be addressed by mechanical or mechatronic changes to prosthetic design to improve quality of recovery and reduce the likelihood a fall.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
导致经股置换假肢使用者跌倒的因素:假肢侧趔趄恢复反应案例系列。
背景:在经股假肢使用者中,因跌跌撞撞而跌倒的情况非常普遍,可能会导致受伤风险增加。本初步病例系列分析了经股假肢使用者的踉跄恢复反应,以突出目前市售假肢的主要缺陷,并提出改善恢复结果的潜在干预措施:方法:六名经股置换假肢使用者在跑步机上行走时,在摆动初期、中期和后期使用障碍物扰动假肢至少三次。收集的运动学数据用于描述反应特征,而跌倒率和关键运动学恢复指标则用于评估恢复质量,并突出当前市售假肢的功能缺陷:在所有参与者中,24 次试验中有 13 次(54%)导致跌倒(定义为> 50%体重支撑),除一名参与者(83%)外,其他参与者至少跌倒一次,两名参与者(33%)每次都跌倒。与此形成鲜明对比的是,在之前的一项研究中,七名年轻、无运动障碍的非假肢使用者使用相同的实验装置,在 190 次试验中没有发生摔倒。在经股假肢使用者中,早期摆动的跌倒率最高,为 64%,其次是中期摆动,为 57%,然后是晚期摆动,为 33%。摔倒的趋势与运动恢复指标(躯干角度峰值、躯干角速度峰值、受干扰肢体的前伸幅度和接触地面时的膝关节角度)相吻合。与非假肢使用者对照组相比,在早期摆动时,所有四项指标都存在缺陷。在摆动中期,除躯干角速度外,其他指标都有缺陷。在挥杆后期,只有前伸存在不足:根据绊倒恢复反应,膝关节假肢的反应中发现了四个潜在缺陷:(1)接触地面时对站立膝关节屈曲的阻力不足;(2)扰动后的摆动伸展不足;(3)扰动后难以启动摆动屈曲;以及(4)摆动早期对摆动屈曲的阻力过大,妨碍了升高策略的潜在利用。这些问题都可以通过对假肢设计进行机械或机电一体化改动来解决,从而提高恢复质量并降低跌倒的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 工程技术-工程:生物医学
CiteScore
9.60
自引率
3.90%
发文量
122
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation considers manuscripts on all aspects of research that result from cross-fertilization of the fields of neuroscience, biomedical engineering, and physical medicine & rehabilitation.
期刊最新文献
A one-year follow-up case series on gait analysis and patient-reported outcomes for persons with unilateral and bilateral transfemoral amputations undergoing direct skeletal fixation. Telerehabilitation using a 2-D planar arm rehabilitation robot for hemiparetic stroke: a feasibility study of clinic-to-home exergaming therapy. Therapeutic effects of powered exoskeletal robot-assisted gait training in inpatients in the early stage after stroke: a pilot case-controlled study. Non-invasive brain stimulation enhances motor and cognitive performances during dual tasks in patients with Parkinson's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Myoelectric motor execution and sensory training to treat chronic pain and paralysis in a replanted arm: a case study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1