M. J. Highsmith, Jason T. Kahle, Rebecca M Miro, L. Mengelkoch
{"title":"使用关节和非关节膝关节假体的经股骨截肢跑步者行走和跑步时的生物能量差异。","authors":"M. J. Highsmith, Jason T. Kahle, Rebecca M Miro, L. Mengelkoch","doi":"10.21300/18.2-3.2016.159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transfemoral amputation (TFA) patients require considerably more energy to walk and run than non-amputees. The purpose of this study was to examine potential bioenergetic differences (oxygen uptake (VO2), heart rate (HR), and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE)) for TFA patients utilizing a conventional running prosthesis with an articulating knee mechanism versus a running prosthesis with a non-articulating knee joint. Four trained TFA runners (n = 4) were accommodated to and tested with both conditions. VO2 and HR were significantly lower (p ≤ 0.05) in five of eight fixed walking and running speeds for the prosthesis with an articulating knee mechanism. TFA demonstrated a trend for lower RPE at six of eight walking speeds using the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. A trend was observed for self-selected walking speed, self-selected running speed, and maximal speed to be faster for TFA subjects using the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. Finally, all four TFA participants subjectively preferred running with the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. These findings suggest that, for trained TFA runners, a running prosthesis with an articulating knee prosthesis reduces ambulatory energy costs and enhances subjective perceptive measures compared to using a non-articulating knee prosthesis.","PeriodicalId":44009,"journal":{"name":"Technology and Innovation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"BIOENERGETIC DIFFERENCES DURING WALKING AND RUNNING IN TRANSFEMORAL AMPUTEE RUNNERS USING ARTICULATING AND NON-ARTICULATING KNEE PROSTHESES.\",\"authors\":\"M. J. Highsmith, Jason T. Kahle, Rebecca M Miro, L. Mengelkoch\",\"doi\":\"10.21300/18.2-3.2016.159\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Transfemoral amputation (TFA) patients require considerably more energy to walk and run than non-amputees. The purpose of this study was to examine potential bioenergetic differences (oxygen uptake (VO2), heart rate (HR), and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE)) for TFA patients utilizing a conventional running prosthesis with an articulating knee mechanism versus a running prosthesis with a non-articulating knee joint. Four trained TFA runners (n = 4) were accommodated to and tested with both conditions. VO2 and HR were significantly lower (p ≤ 0.05) in five of eight fixed walking and running speeds for the prosthesis with an articulating knee mechanism. TFA demonstrated a trend for lower RPE at six of eight walking speeds using the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. A trend was observed for self-selected walking speed, self-selected running speed, and maximal speed to be faster for TFA subjects using the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. Finally, all four TFA participants subjectively preferred running with the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. These findings suggest that, for trained TFA runners, a running prosthesis with an articulating knee prosthesis reduces ambulatory energy costs and enhances subjective perceptive measures compared to using a non-articulating knee prosthesis.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44009,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technology and Innovation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technology and Innovation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21300/18.2-3.2016.159\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology and Innovation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21300/18.2-3.2016.159","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
BIOENERGETIC DIFFERENCES DURING WALKING AND RUNNING IN TRANSFEMORAL AMPUTEE RUNNERS USING ARTICULATING AND NON-ARTICULATING KNEE PROSTHESES.
Transfemoral amputation (TFA) patients require considerably more energy to walk and run than non-amputees. The purpose of this study was to examine potential bioenergetic differences (oxygen uptake (VO2), heart rate (HR), and ratings of perceived exertion (RPE)) for TFA patients utilizing a conventional running prosthesis with an articulating knee mechanism versus a running prosthesis with a non-articulating knee joint. Four trained TFA runners (n = 4) were accommodated to and tested with both conditions. VO2 and HR were significantly lower (p ≤ 0.05) in five of eight fixed walking and running speeds for the prosthesis with an articulating knee mechanism. TFA demonstrated a trend for lower RPE at six of eight walking speeds using the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. A trend was observed for self-selected walking speed, self-selected running speed, and maximal speed to be faster for TFA subjects using the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. Finally, all four TFA participants subjectively preferred running with the prosthesis with the articulated knee condition. These findings suggest that, for trained TFA runners, a running prosthesis with an articulating knee prosthesis reduces ambulatory energy costs and enhances subjective perceptive measures compared to using a non-articulating knee prosthesis.