Greater than recommended stiffness and power setting of a stance-phase powered leg prosthesis can improve step-to-step transition work and effective foot length ratio during walking in people with transtibial amputation.

People with unilateral transtibial amputation (TTA) using a passive-elastic prosthesis exhibit lower positive affected leg trailing work (ALtrail Wpos) and a greater magnitude of negative unaffected leg leading work (ULlead Wneg) during walking than non-amputees, which may increase joint pain and osteoarthritis risk in the unaffected leg. People with TTA using a stance-phase powered prosthesis (e.g., BiOM, Ottobock, Duderstadt, Germany) walk with increased ALtrail Wpos and potentially decreased magnitude of ULlead Wneg compared to a passive-elastic prosthesis. The BiOM includes a passive-elastic prosthesis with a manufacturer-recommended stiffness category and can be tuned to different power settings, which may change ALtrail Wpos, ULlead Wneg, and the prosthesis effective foot length ratio (EFLR). Thirteen people with TTA walked using 16 different prosthetic stiffness category and power settings on a level treadmill at 0.75-1.75 m/s. We constructed linear mixed effects models to determine the effects of stiffness category and power settings on ALtrail Wpos, ULlead Wneg, and EFLR and hypothesized that decreased stiffness and increased power would increase ALtrail Wpos, not change and decrease ULlead Wneg magnitude, and decrease and not change prosthesis EFLR, respectively. We found there was no significant effect of stiffness category on ALtrail Wpos but increased stiffness reduced ULlead Wneg magnitude, perhaps due to a 0.02 increase in prosthesis EFLR compared to the least stiff category. Furthermore, we found that use of the BiOM with 10% and 20% greater than recommended power increased ALtrail Wpos and decreased ULlead Wneg magnitude at 0.75-1.00 m/s. However, prosthetic power setting depended on walking speed so that use of the BiOM increased ULlead Wneg magnitude at 1.50-1.75 m/s compared to a passive-elastic prosthesis. Ultimately, our results suggest that at 0.75-1.00 m/s, prosthetists should utilize the BiOM attached to a passive-elastic prosthesis with an increased stiffness category and power settings up to 20% greater than recommended based on biological ankle values. This prosthetic configuration can allow people with unilateral transtibial amputation to increase ALtrail Wpos and minimize ULlead Wneg magnitude, which could reduce joint pain and osteoarthritis risk in the unaffected leg and potentially lower the metabolic cost of walking.

Low-profile prosthetic foot stiffness category and size, and shoes affect axial and torsional stiffness and hysteresis.

Introduction: Passive-elastic prosthetic feet are manufactured with numerical stiffness categories and prescribed based on the user's body mass and activity level, but mechanical properties, such as stiffness values and hysteresis are not typically reported. Since the mechanical properties of passive-elastic prosthetic feet and footwear can affect walking biomechanics of people with transtibial or transfemoral amputation, characterizing these properties can provide objective metrics for comparison and aid prosthetic foot prescription and design. Methods: We characterized axial and torsional stiffness values, and hysteresis of 33 categories and sizes of a commercially available passive-elastic prosthetic foot model [Össur low-profile (LP) Vari-flex] with and without a shoe. We assumed a greater numerical stiffness category would result in greater axial and torsional stiffness values but would not affect hysteresis. We hypothesized that a greater prosthetic foot length would not affect axial stiffness values or hysteresis but would result in greater torsional stiffness values. We also hypothesized that including a shoe would result in decreased axial and torsional stiffness values and greater hysteresis. Results: Prosthetic stiffness was better described by curvilinear than linear equations such that stiffness values increased with greater loads. In general, a greater numerical stiffness category resulted in increased heel, midfoot, and forefoot axial stiffness values, increased plantarflexion and dorsiflexion torsional stiffness values, and decreased heel, midfoot, and forefoot hysteresis. Moreover, for a given category, a longer prosthetic foot size resulted in decreased heel, midfoot, and forefoot axial stiffness values, increased plantarflexion and dorsiflexion torsional stiffness values, and decreased heel and midfoot hysteresis. In addition, adding a shoe to the prosthetic foot resulted in decreased heel and midfoot axial stiffness values, decreased plantarflexion torsional stiffness values, and increased heel, midfoot, and forefoot hysteresis. Discussion: Our results suggest that manufacturers should adjust the design of each category to ensure the mechanical properties are consistent across different sizes and highlight the need for prosthetists and researchers to consider the effects of shoes in combination with prostheses. Our results can be used to objectively compare the LP Vari-flex prosthetic foot to other prosthetic feet to inform their prescription, design, and use for people with a transtibial or transfemoral amputation.

Effects of powered versus passive-elastic ankle foot prostheses on leg muscle activity during level, uphill and downhill walking.

People with transtibial amputation (TTA) using passive-elastic prostheses have greater leg muscle activity and metabolic cost during level-ground and sloped walking than non-amputees. Use of a stance-phase powered (BiOM) versus passive-elastic prosthesis reduces metabolic cost for people with TTA during level-ground, +3° and +6° walking. Metabolic cost is associated with muscle activity, which may provide insight into differences between prostheses. We measured affected leg (AL) and unaffected leg (UL) muscle activity from ten people with TTA (6 males, 4 females) walking at 1.25 m s-1 on a dual-belt force-measuring treadmill at 0°, ±3°, ±6° and ±9° using their own passive-elastic and the BiOM prosthesis. We compared stride average integrated EMG (iEMG), peak EMG and muscle activity burst duration. Use of the BiOM increased UL lateral gastrocnemius iEMG on downhill slopes and AL biceps femoris on +6° and +9° slopes, and decreased UL rectus femoris on uphill slopes, UL vastus lateralis on +6° and +9°, and soleus and tibialis anterior on a +9° slope compared to a passive-elastic prosthesis. Differences in leg muscle activity for people with TTA using a passive-elastic versus stance-phase powered prosthesis do not clearly explain differences in metabolic cost during walking on level ground and slopes.