Donor Limb Functional Restoration via a Novel Clinical Care Pathway following Fibula Free Flap Harvest for Head and Neck Reconstruction.

Patients undergoing head and neck skeletal reconstruction (HNR) often require free tissue transfer from the extremities to ensure proper restoration of form and function. This requires a team-based, highly reliable medical system centered around the patient needs. Surgical intervention across multiple sites and harvesting of donor tissue results in short- and long-term physical impairments. There is a paucity of research objectively measuring impairments resulting from the graft donor site. There is a lack of research that objectively measures impairments and protocols for the management of these patients postoperatively. Patients undergo little, if any, formal approach to dealing with the vast impairments, which are sequelae to this surgery. This leads to large discrepancies in proposed functional progressions, return to duty timelines, and utilization of rehabilitative resources. At a major military medical center, an innovative clinical care pathway for patients undergoing HNR using free tissue transfer was implemented using a multidisciplinary model that focuses on early engagement with rehabilitation. This model, paired with a single surgery, will attempt to return service members to duty months earlier than the traditional approach. This report describes the conceptual framework and implementation of a new criteria-based, multidisciplinary clinical care pathway for HNR patients. The collaboration amongst the multidisciplinary care team has optimized the holistic health of the patient and communication with their support network, yielding faster return to normalization of daily life activities. The long-term goal is to further develop and formalize this pathway to best serve this patient population.

Fall Prevention Training for Service Members With an Amputation or Limb Salvage Following Lower Extremity Trauma.

INTRODUCTION: Recent military conflicts have resulted in a significant number of lower extremity injuries to U.S. service members that result in amputation or limb preservation (LP) procedures. Service members receiving these procedures report a high prevalence and deleterious consequences of falls. Very little research exists to improve balance and reduce falls, especially among young active populations such as service members with LP or limb loss. To address this research gap, we evaluated the success of a fall prevention training program for service members with lower extremity trauma by (1) measuring fall rates, (2) quantifying improvements in trunk control, and (3) determining skill retention at 3 and 6 months after training. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-five participants (40 males, mean [±SD] age, 34 ± 8 years) with lower extremity trauma (20 with unilateral transtibial amputation, 6 with unilateral transfemoral amputation, 5 with bilateral transtibial amputation, and 14 with unilateral LP procedures) were enrolled. A microprocessor-controlled treadmill was used to produce task-specific postural perturbations which simulated a trip. The training was conducted over a 2-week period and consisted of six 30-minute sessions. The task difficulty was increased as the participant's ability progressed. The effectiveness of the training program was assessed by collecting data before training (baseline; repeated twice), immediately after training (0 month), and at 3 and 6 months post-training. Training effectiveness was quantified by participant-reported falls in the free-living environment before and after training. Perturbation-induced recovery step trunk flexion angle and velocity was also collected. RESULTS: Participants reported reduced falls and improved balance confidence in the free-living environment following the training. Repeated testing before training revealed that there were no pre-training differences in trunk control. The training program improved trunk control following training, and these skills were retained at 3 and 6 months after training. CONCLUSION: This study showed that task-specific fall prevention training reduced falls across a cohort of service members with diverse types of amputations and LP procedures following lower extremity trauma. Importantly, the clinical outcome of this effort (i.e., reduced falls and improved balance confidence) can lead to increased participation in occupational, recreational, and social activities and thus improved quality of life.

Running footstrike pattern effect on lower extremity work in an individual with transtibial amputation.

Asymmetrical loading favoring the intact limb during running has been associated with increased prevalence of reported knee pain and potential risk factors of knee osteoarthritis in that limb for patients with amputation. Footstrike pattern alterations have been suggested to help alleviate some overloading of the knee, but little is known about how it affects the rest of the limb. The purpose of this case study was to evaluate the effect of footstrike pattern on the distribution of loading throughout the lower extremities during submaximal running of an individual with transtibial amputation (TTA). This study compared loading distribution among the lower extremity joints in a male patient who sustained a TTA and ran using both a rearfoot (RFS) and forefoot strike (FFS) pattern. The results of this case demonstrated that altering footstrike pattern minimally alters the total mechanical work being done by the lower extremities but more so affects the relative amount of work contributed by the individual joints. In the intact limb, the ankle contributes the most to power absorption using a FFS pattern while the knee has a larger role using a RFS pattern. This case suggests that the footstrike pattern affects lower extremity loading distribution at the joint level, and adopting a FFS pattern may alleviate overloading the knee, whereas a RFS pattern may reduce loading at the ankle in individuals with TTA.

Common fall-risk indicators are not associated with fall prevalence in a high-functioning military population with lower limb trauma.

BACKGROUND: Persons with lower limb trauma are at high risk for falls. Although there is a wide range of measures used to assess stability and fall-risk that include performance measures, temporal-spatial gait parameters, and nonlinear dynamic stability calculations, these measures are typically derived from fall-prone populations, such as older adults. Thus, it is unclear if these commonly used fall-risk indicators are effective at evaluating fall-risk in a younger, higher-functioning population of Service members with lower limb trauma. METHODS: Twenty-one Service members with lower limb trauma completed a battery of fall-risk assessments that included performance measures (e.g., four-square-step-test), and gait parameters (e.g., step width, step length, step time) and dynamic stability measures (e.g., local divergence exponents) during 10 min of treadmill walking. Participants also reported the number of stumbles and falls over the previous 4 weeks. Negative Binomial and Quasibinomial Regressions were used to evaluate the strength of associations between fall-risk indicators and self-reported falls. FINDING: Participants reported on average stumbling 6(4) times and falling 2(3) times in the previous 4 weeks. At least one fall was reported by 62% of the participants. None of the fall-risk indicators were significantly associated with fall prevalence in this population of Service members with lower limb trauma (p > 0.1). INTERPRETATION: Despite the high number of reported falls in this young active population, none of the fall-risk indicators investigated effectively captured and quantified the fall-risk. Further research is needed to identify appropriate fall-risk assessments for young, high-functioning individuals with lower limb trauma.

Assessments of trunk postural control within a fall-prevention training program for service members with lower limb trauma and loss.

BACKGROUND: Trunk postural control (TPC) is critical in maintaining balance following perturbations (i.e., avoiding falls), and impaired among persons with lower extremity trauma, contributing to elevated fall risk. Previously, a fall-prevention program improved TPC in individuals with unilateral transtibial amputation following trip-inducing perturbations. However, it is presently unclear if these improvements are task specific. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do improvements to TPC gained from a fall-prevention program translate to another task which assesses TPC in isolation (i.e., unstable sitting)? Secondarily, can isolated TPC be used to identify who would benefit most from the fall-prevention program? METHODS: Twenty-five individuals (21 male/4 female) with lower extremity trauma, who participated in a larger fall-prevention program, were included in this analysis. Trunk flexion and flexion velocity quantified TPC following perturbation; accelerometer-based sway parameters quantified TPC during unstable sitting. A generalized linear mixed-effects model assessed training-induced differences in TPC after perturbation; a generalized linear model assessed differences in sway parameters following training. Spearman's rho related training-induced changes to TPC following perturbation (i.e., the difference in TPC measures at pre- and post-training assessments) with pre- vs. post-training changes to sway parameters during unstable sitting (i.e., the difference in sway parameters at pre- and post-training assessments) as well as pre-training sway parameters with the pre- vs. post-training differences in TPC following perturbation. RESULTS: Following training, trunk flexion angles decreased, indicating improved TPC; however, sway parameters did not differ pre- and post-training. In addition, pre- vs. post-training differences in TPC following perturbation were neither strongly nor significantly correlated with sway parameters. Moreover, pre-training sway parameters did not correlate with pre- vs. post-training differences in trunk flexion/flexion velocity. SIGNIFICANCE: Overall, these results indicate that improvements to TPC gained from fall-prevention training are task-specific and do not translate to other activities. Moreover, isolated TPC measures are not able to identify individuals that benefit most from the fall-prevention program.

Military Service Members with Major Lower Extremity Fractures Return to Running with a Passive-dynamic Ankle-foot Orthosis: Comparison with a Normative Population.

BACKGROUND: Lower extremity fractures represent a high percentage of reported injuries in the United States military and can devastate a service member's career. A passive dynamic ankle-foot orthosis (PD-AFO) with a specialized rehabilitation program was initially designed to treat military service members after complex battlefield lower extremity injuries, returning a select group of motivated individuals back to running. For high-demand users of the PD-AFO, the spatiotemporal gait parameters, agility, and quality of life is not fully understood with respect to uninjured runners. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Do patients who sustained a lower extremity fracture using a PD-AFO with a specialized rehabilitation program differ from uninjured service members acting as controls, as measured by (1) time-distance and biomechanical parameters associated with running, (2) agility testing (using the Comprehensive High-level Activity Mobility Predictor performance test and Four Square Step Test), and (3) the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment score. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective data analysis of a longitudinally collected data registry of patients using a PD-AFO from 2015 to 2017 at a single institution. The specific study cohort were patients with a unilateral lower extremity fracture who used the PD-AFO for running. Patients had to be fit with a PD-AFO, have completed rehabilitation, and have undergone a three-dimensional (3-D) running analysis at a self-selected speed at the completion of the program. Of the 90 patients who used the PD-AFO for various reasons, 10 male service members with lower extremity fractures who used a PD-AFO for running (median [range] age 29 years [22 to 41], height 1.8 meters [1.7 to 1.9], weight 91.6 kg [70 to 112]) were compared with 15 uninjured male runners in the military (median age 33 years [21 to 42], height 1.8 meters [1.7 to 1.9], weight 81.6 kg [71.2 to 98.9]). The uninjured runners were active-duty service members who voluntarily participated in a gait analysis at their own self-selected running speeds; to meet eligibility for inclusion as an uninjured control, the members had to be fit for full duty without any medical restrictions, and they had to be able to run 5 miles. The controls were then matched to the study group by age, weight, and height. The primary study outcome variables were the running time-distance parameters and frontal and sagittal plane kinematics of the trunk and pelvis during running. The Four Square Step Test, Comprehensive High-level Activity Mobility Predictor scores, and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment scores were analyzed for all groups as secondary outcomes. Nonparametric analyses were performed to determine differences between the two groups at p < 0.05. RESULTS: For the primary outcome, patients with a PD-AFO exhibited no differences compared with uninjured runners in median (range) running velocity (3.9 meters/second [3.4 to 4.2] versus 4.1 meters/second [3.1 to 4.8], median difference 0.2; p = 0.69), cadence (179 steps/minute [169 to 186] versus 173 steps/minute [159 to 191], median difference 5.8; p = 0.43), stride length (2.6 meters [2.4 to 2.9] versus 2.8 meters [2.3 to 3.3], median difference 0.2; p = 0.23), or sagittal plane parameters such as peak pelvic tilt (24° [15° to 33°] versus 22° [14° to 28°], median difference 1.6°; p = 0.43) and trunk forward flexion (16.2° [7.3° to 23°) versus 15.4° [4.2° to 21°), median difference 0.8°; p > 0.99) with the numbers available. For the secondary outcomes, runners with a PD-AFO performed worse in Comprehensive High-level Activity Mobility Predictor performance testing than uninjured runners did, with their four scores demonstrating a median (range) single-limb stance of 35 seconds (32 to 58) versus 60 seconds (60 to 60) (median difference 25 seconds; p < 0.001), t-test result of 15 seconds (13 to 20) versus 13 seconds (10 to 14) (median difference 2 seconds; p < 0.001), and Illinois Agility Test result of 22 seconds (20 to 25) versus 18 seconds (16 to 20) (median difference 4; p < 0.001). Edgren side step test result of 20 meters (16 to 26) versus 24 meters (16 to 29) (median difference 4 meters; p = 0.11) and the Four Square Step Test of 5.5 seconds (4.1 to 7.2) versus 4.2 seconds (3.1 to 7.3) (median difference 1.3 seconds; p = 0.39) were not different between the groups with an effect size of 0.83 and 0.75, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results of our study demonstrate that service members run with discernible differences in high-level mobility and demonstrate inferior self-reported patient functioning while having no differences in speed and biomechanics compared with their noninjured counterparts with the sample size available. This study is an early report on functional gains of highly motivated service members with major lower extremity injuries who use a PD-AFO and formalized therapy program to run. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Are Gait Parameters for Through-knee Amputees Different From Matched Transfemoral Amputees?

BACKGROUND: Through-knee amputation is a common amputation level after battlefield injuries during the medical evacuation process. However, there are limited data comparing through-knee amputation with transfemoral amputation as a definitive amputation level in terms of gait parameters. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Does through-knee amputation result in improved gait velocity when compared with matched transfemoral amputees? (2) Do through-knee amputees have a faster gait cadence than matched transfemoral amputees? (3) Do through-knee amputees have a different stride length or stride width than matched transfemoral amputees? (4) Does through-knee amputation result in decreased work of ambulation when compared with matched transfemoral amputees? METHODS: Between January 2008 and December 2012, six male active-duty military patients who had undergone unilateral through-knee amputations as a result of trauma underwent gait studies at our institution. Of those, four of six underwent gait analysis after being able to walk for at least 3 months without assistive devices, and this group was studied here. Most through-knee amputees who were not included had elective revisions of their amputations from through-knee to a transfemoral amputation before completing 3-month gait data. Each of the amputees studied was matched to a transfemoral amputee based on height, body mass index, and contralateral amputation level resulting in a case-control study of active-duty military male amputee patients. Inclusion required complete gait data collected while walking at a self-selected pace wearing custom prosthetic devices. The through-knee amputees had a median (range) age of 32 years (23-41 years) and the transfemoral amputees had a median age of 24 years (22-27 years). Three-dimensional gait data were collected and analyzed. A power analysis found that to detect a clinically important difference (set at a change in work of ambulation of 1 J/kgm) with a p value of 0.05 and a ß set to 0.2, a study population of 56 patients per group would be required; that being said, our results on a much smaller population must be considered exploratory. RESULTS: With the numbers available, we found no differences in gait velocity when comparing through-knee (1.18 m/sec) and matched transfemoral amputees (1.20 m/sec, difference of medians = 0.02 m/sec; p = 0.964). Likewise, we found no differences in gait cadence when comparing through-knee with transfemoral amputees (104 versus 106 steps/min, respectively, difference of means 2 steps/min, p = 0.971). There was no difference in stride length or stride width when comparing through-knee (70 cm and 18 cm, respectively) with transfemoral amputees (70 cm and 19 cm, respectively; p = 0.948 and p = 0.440). With the numbers available, we did not identify a difference in the work of ambulation for through-knee amputees when compared with matched transfemoral amputees (8.3 versus 7.5 J/kg, respectively; p = 0.396). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our findings, we are unable to demonstrate any functional advantages of knee disarticulation over transfemoral amputation. Although there are theoretical advantages for maintaining an intact femur during the medical evacuation and serial débridement process, we question the utility of knee disarticulation as a definitive amputation level; however, larger numbers of patients are needed to confirm these results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Measuring Abnormality in High Dimensional Spaces with Applications in Biomechanical Gait Analysis.

Accurately measuring a subject's abnormality using high dimensional data can empower better outcomes research. Utilizing applications in instrumented gait analysis, this article demonstrates how using data that is inherently non-independent to measure overall abnormality may bias results. A methodology is then introduced to address this bias and accurately measure abnormality in high dimensional spaces. While this methodology is in line with previous literature, it differs in two major ways. Advantageously, it can be applied to datasets in which the number of observations is less than the number of features/variables, and it can be abstracted to practically any number of domains or dimensions. Initial results of these methods show that they can detect known, real-world differences in abnormality between subject groups where established measures could not. This methodology is made freely available via the abnormality R package on CRAN.

Limb Salvage With Intrepid Dynamic Exoskeletal Orthosis Versus Transtibial Amputation: A Comparison of Functional Gait Outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if there is a difference in functional gait outcomes between patients with limb injuries treated with either transtibial amputation or limb preservation with the Intrepid Dynamic Exoskeletal Orthosis. DESIGN: Retrospective prognostic study. SETTING: Tertiary referral military hospital. PATIENTS: This study included 10 transtibial amputees and 10 limb preservation patients using the Intrepid Dynamic Exoskeletal Orthosis who were matched by body mass index after excluding for nontraumatic, proximal ipsilateral, contralateral, spine, or traumatic brain injuries. Transtibial amputation patients were also excluded if they did not have a gait study between 6 and 12 months after independent ambulation. Limb preservation were excluded if they did not complete the "Return to Run" program. INTERVENTIONS: An observational study of functional outcomes using instrumented gait analysis. OUTCOME MEASURES: Spatiotemporal, kinetic (vertical ground reaction force), unified deformable power, work, and efficiency. RESULTS: Limb preservation patients walked with a significantly slower cadence (P = 0.036) and spent less time on their affected limb in stance (P = 0.045), and longer in swing (P = 0.019). Amputees had significantly increased maximum positive power in both limbs (P = 0.004 and P = 0.029) and increased maximum negative power on the unaffected limb (P = 0.035). Amputees had significantly increased positive and negative work in the affected limb (P = 0.0009 and P = 0.014) and positive work in the unaffected limb (P = 0.042). There was no significant difference in the kinetic data or efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Limb preservation patients spend less time on their affected limb as a percentage of the gait cycle. The unified deformable power demonstrated more dynamic gait in amputees, with peak values closer to normative data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Mechanical testing for three-dimensional motion analysis reliability.

The purpose of this study was to use simple mechanical tests to evaluate the reliability of three-dimensional motion analysis systems and biomechanical models. Three different tests were conducted at four motion analysis laboratories where clinical care and research studies are routinely performed. The laboratories had different motion capture systems, different types and number of cameras, different types and numbers of force plates and different biomechanical models. These mechanical tests evaluated the accuracy of the motion capture system, the integration of the force plate and the motion capture system, and the strength of the biomechanical model used to calculate rotational kinematics. Results of motion capture system accuracy tests showed that, for all labs, the error between the measured and calculated distances between markers was less than 2mm and 1° for marker separations which ranged from 24mm to 500mm. Results from the force plate integration tests demonstrated errors in center of pressure calculation of less than 4mm across all labs, despite varied force plate and motion system configurations. Finally, errors across labs for single joint rotations and for combined rotations at the hip and knee were less than 2° at the hip and less than 10° at the knee. These results demonstrate that system accuracy and reliability can be obtained allowing the collection of comparable data across different motion analysis laboratories with varying configurations and equipment. This testing is particularly important when multi-center studies are planned in order to assure data consistency across labs.

Reliability of 3D gait data across multiple laboratories.

The aim of this study was to analyze the repeatability of gait analysis studies performed across multiple trials, sessions, and laboratories. Ten healthy participants (6 male/4 female, mean age of 30, mean BMI of 24kg/m(2)) were assessed in 3 sessions conducted at each of the three Centers of Excellence for Amputee Care within the Department of Defense. For each test session, kinematic and kinetic parameters were collected during five walking trials for each limb. One independent examiner at each site placed markers on the subjects. Biomechanical data were collected at two walking speeds: self-selected and Froude speed. Variability of the gait data was attributed to inter-trial, inter-session, and inter-lab errors for each subject. These error sources were averaged across all ten subjects to obtain a pooled error estimate. The kinematic errors were fairly consistent at the two walking speeds tested. Median inter-lab kinematic errors were <5.0° (median 2.3°) for all joint angle measurements. However, the kinetic error differed significantly between walking speeds. The median inter-lab kinetic error for the self-selected speed was 0.112Nm/kg (ICR 0.091-0.184) with a maximum of 0.226Nm/kg. The errors were greatly reduced when the subjects walked at their Froude speed. The median inter-lab error was 0.048Nm/kg (ICR 0.025-0.078, maximum 0.086). These data demonstrate that it is possible to get reliable data across multiple gait laboratories, particularly when gait speed is standardized across testing sessions. A key similarity between sites was the use of identical anatomical segment definitions for the respective gait models.

Do patients with bone bridge amputations have improved gait compared with patients with traditional amputations?

BACKGROUND: Two surgical techniques for performing a transtibial amputation include a traditional approach and a bone bridge approach. To date, there is no conclusive evidence of superiority of either technique in terms of temporal-spatial, kinetic, and mechanical work parameters. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We sought to compare instrumented three-dimensional gait parameters and mechanical work measurements of patients who had undergone a traditional or bone bridge amputation at the transtibial level. Residual limb length and its effect on those functional outcomes was a secondary interest irrespective of amputation type. METHODS: This retrospective comparative study included 14 active-duty military men with a mean age of 25 years (range, 20-28 years). Comparisons were made between seven patients with traditional and seven patients with bone bridge amputations at the transtibial level. The patients walked at self-selected and fast paces while three-dimensional gait analysis data were collected and comparisons were made between patients with the two amputation types as well as by length of the residual limb. RESULTS: With the numbers available, we observed no differences between the two surgical groups at either speed for the temporal-spatial parameters or mechanical work metrics. However, the bone bridge group did demonstrate greater rolloff vertical ground reaction force during the fast walking condition with a median 1.02% of body weight compared with 0.94% (p = 0.046), which suggests a more stable platform in terminal stance. When the two groups were combined into one to test the effect of residual limb length, the linear regression resulted in an R(2) value of 0.419 (p = 0.012), in which patients with longer residual limbs had improved F3 force values during self-selected walking. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, limited functional differences were found between the two groups in this small pilot study, so a superior surgical technique could not be determined; whereas our limited sample size prevents a firm conclusion of no difference, our data can be considered hypothesis-generating for future, larger studies. Although some evidence indicated that patients with a bone bridge have improved loading at higher speeds, a regression of all patients walking at self-selected speed indicates that as residual limb length increases, loading increases regardless of amputation type. Thus, our data suggest it is important to preserve residual limb length to allow for improved loading in terminal stance.

Method for evoking a trip-like response using a treadmill-based perturbation during locomotion.

Because trip-related falls account for a significant proportion of falls by patients with amputations and older adults, the ability to repeatedly and reliably simulate a trip or evoke a trip-like response in a laboratory setting has potential utility as a tool to assess trip-related fall risk and as a training tool to reduce fall risk. This paper describes a treadmill-based method for delivering postural perturbations during locomotion to evoke a trip-like response and serve as a surrogate for an overground trip. Subjects walked at a normalized velocity in a Computer Assisted Rehabilitation Environment (CAREN). During single-limb stance, the treadmill belt speed was rapidly changed, thereby requiring the subject to perform a compensatory stepping response to avoid falling. Peak trunk flexion angle and peak trunk flexion velocity during the initial compensatory step following the perturbation were smaller for responses associated with recoveries compared to those associated with falls. These key fall prediction variables were consistent with the outcomes observed for laboratory-induced trips of older adults. This perturbation technique also demonstrated that this method of repeated but randomly delivered perturbations can evoke consistent, within-subject responses.