Adjustable prosthetic sockets: a systematic review of industrial and research design characteristics and their justifications.

BACKGROUND: The prosthetic socket is a key component that influences prosthesis satisfaction, with a poorly fitting prosthetic socket linked to prosthesis abandonment and reduced community participation. This paper reviews adjustable socket designs, as they have the potential to improve prosthetic fit and comfort through accommodating residual limb volume fluctuations and alleviating undue socket pressure. METHODS: Systematic literature and patent searches were conducted across multiple databases to identify articles and patents that discussed adjustable prosthetic sockets. The patents were used to find companies, organisations, and institutions who currently sell adjustable sockets or who are developing devices. RESULTS: 50 literature articles and 63 patents were identified for inclusion, representing 35 different designs used in literature and 16 commercially available products. Adjustable sockets are becoming more prevalent with 73% of publications (literature, patents, and news) occurring within the last ten years. Two key design characteristics were identified: principle of adjustability (inflatable bladders, moveable panels, circumferential adjustment, variable length), and surface form (conformable, rigid multi-DOF, and rigid single DOF). Inflatable bladders contributed to 40% of literature used designs with only one identified commercially available design (n = 16) using this approach. Whereas circumferential adjustment designs covered 75% of identified industry designs compared to only 36% of literature devices. Clinical studies were generally small in size and only 17.6% of them assessed a commercially available socket. DISCUSSION: There are clear differences in the design focus taken by industry and researchers, with justification for choice of design and range of adjustment often being unclear. Whilst comfort is often reported as improved with an adjustable socket, the rationale behind this is not often discussed, and small study sizes reduce the outcome viability. Many adjustable sockets lack appropriate safety features to limit over or under tightening, which may present a risk of tissue damage or provide inadequate coupling, affecting function and satisfaction. Furthermore, the relationship between design and comfort or function are rarely investigated and remain a significant gap in the literature. Finally, this review highlights the need for improved collaboration between academia and industry, with a strong disconnect observed between commercial devices and published research studies.

Enforcing walking speed and step-length affects joint kinematics and kinetics in male and female healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: Individuals increase walking speed by increasing their step-length, increasing their step-frequency, or both. During basic training military recruits are introduced to marching "in-step", and thus the requirement to walk at fixed speeds and step-lengths. The extent to which individuals are required to under- or over-stride will vary depending on their stature, and the stature of others in their section. The incidence of stress fractures in female recruits undergoing basic training is higher than that for their male counterparts. RESEARCH QUESTION: Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine how joint kinematics and kinetics are affected by walking speed, step-length, and sex. METHODS: Thirty-seven (19 female) aerobically active non-injured individuals volunteered for this study. Synchronised three-dimensional kinematic and kinetic data were collected while participants walked overground at prescribed speeds. Audio and visual cues were used to control step-lengths. Linear mixed models were run to analyse the effects of speed, step-length condition, and sex on peak joint moments. RESULTS AND SIGNIFICANCE: The findings of this study showed that, in general, walking faster and over-striding predominantly increased peak joint moments, suggesting that over-striding is more likely to negatively affect injury risk than under-striding. This is especially important for individuals unaccustomed to over-striding as the cumulative effect of increased joint moments may affect a muscles capability to withstand the increased external forces associated with walking faster and with longer step-lengths, which could then lead to an increased risk of developing an injury.

Role of sex and stature on the biomechanics of normal and loaded walking: implications for injury risk in the military.

Load carriage and marching 'in-step' are routine military activities associated with lower limb injury risk in service personnel. The fixed pace and stride length of marching typically vary from the preferred walking gait and may result in overstriding. Overstriding increases ground reaction forces and muscle forces. Women are more likely to overstride than men due to their shorter stature. These biomechanical responses to overstriding may be most pronounced when marching close to the preferred walk-to-run transition speed. Load carriage also affects walking gait and increases ground reaction forces, joint moments and the demands on the muscles. Few studies have examined the effects of sex and stature on the biomechanics of marching and load carriage; this evidence is required to inform injury prevention strategies, particularly with the full integration of women in some defence forces. This narrative review explores the effects of sex and stature on the biomechanics of unloaded and loaded marching at a fixed pace and evaluates the implications for injury risk. The knowledge gaps in the literature, and distinct lack of studies on women, are highlighted, and areas that need more research to support evidence-based injury prevention measures, especially for women in arduous military roles, are identified.

The effect of sex, stature, and limb length on the preferred walk-to-run transition speed.

BACKGROUND: The preferred walk-to-run transition speed (PTS) for healthy adults is approximately 2 m∙s-1, however, PTS is influenced by anthropometric factors. Yet despite known sex differences in anthropometrics, studies have reported no sex differences in PTS. RESEARCH QUESTION: Do stature and limb length affect PTS in the same way for both male and female healthy adults? METHODS: Thirty-seven (19 female) non-injured adults volunteered for this study. Participants completed a walk-to-run transition protocol, where the treadmill speed was increased from 1.2 m∙s-1 to 2.2 m∙s-1, in increments of 0.1 m∙s-1 every two minutes. An independent t-test compared PTS between sexes. Multiple regression analysis determined the effect of sex and stature and sex and limb length on PTS. RESULTS: Female participants transitioned at a lower PTS than male participants (1.8 (0.2) m∙s-1 versus 1.9 (0.1) m∙s-1; p ≤ 0.026). Sex and stature explained 19% of the variance in PTS, while sex and limb length explained 21% of the variance. Including interactions increased the variance explained by 23% and 2% for sex and stature and sex and limb length, respectively. The significant interaction between sex and stature showed PTS was inversely proportional to stature for male participants but directly proportional for female participants. SIGNIFICANCE: These findings suggest that the extent to which stature and limb length influence the preferred transition speed may differ between sexes.

Kinematic Characteristics of Male Runners With a History of Recurrent Calf Muscle Strain Injury.

BACKGROUND: Calf muscle strain injuries are a common running injury affecting male runners and are known to have high reoccurrence rates. Currently, limited evidence exists investigating factors associated with this injury with no previous study investigating the running kinematics of male runners with a history of repeat calf muscle strain injuries. PURPOSE: To investigate whether male runners with a history of repeat calf muscle strain injury demonstrate differences in stance phase running kinematics when compared to healthy controls. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control investigation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3b. METHODS: Stance phase kinematics were compared between 15 male runners with a history of calf muscle strain injury and 15 male control participants during treadmill running at 3.2m/s. Independent t-tests were used to compare differences in stance phase kinematic parameters between groups and effect sizes were calculated using Cohen's d. RESULTS: The group with a history of calf muscle strain injury demonstrated a significant 2.1° and 3.1° increase in contralateral pelvic drop and anterior pelvic tilt during mid stance. In addition, this group exhibited longer stance times and a more anterior tilted pelvis, flexed hip and a greater distance between the heel and centre of mass at initial contact. Large effect sizes, greater than 0.8, were observed for all differences. No significant differences were observed for ankle and knee joint kinematics between the groups. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to identify kinematic characteristics associated with recurrent calf muscle strain injury. While it is not possible to determine causality, the observed kinematic differences may contribute to recurrent nature of this injury. Specifically, it is possible that neuromuscular deficits of the hip and calf muscle complex may lead to increased strain on the calf complex. Rehabilitation interventions which focus on addressing pelvis and hip kinematics may reduce the demands placed upon the calf complex and could prove clinically effective.

The between-day repeatability, standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change for discrete kinematic parameters during treadmill running.

BACKGROUND: Kinematic parameters of the trunk, pelvis and lower limbs are frequently associated with both running injuries and performance, and the target of clinical interventions. Currently there is limited evidence reporting the between-day repeatability of discrete kinematic parameters of the trunk, pelvis and lower limbs during treadmill running. RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the between-day repeatability, standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change of discrete kinematic parameters of the trunk, pelvis and lower limbs during treadmill running? METHODS: 16 healthy participants attended two kinematic data collection sessions two weeks apart. Three-dimensional kinematic data were collected while participants ran on a motorised treadmill at 3.2 m/s. The interclass correlation coefficient, standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change were calculated for discrete kinematic parameters at initial contact, toe off, peak angles and joint excursions during the stance phase of running. RESULTS: Good to excellent repeatability with low standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change values were observed for sagittal and frontal plane kinematics at initial contact (Range: ICC, 0.829-0.941; SEM, 0.6°- 2.6°; MDC, 1.5°- 7.2) and peak angles during stance (Range: ICC, 0.799 - 0.946; SEM, 0.6°- 2.6°; MDC, 1.7°- 7.1°). Peak transverse plane kinematics of the hip (ICC, 0.783; SEM, 3.2°; MDC, 8.7°) and knee (ICC, 0.739; SEM, 3°; MDC, 8.4°) demonstrated moderate between-day repeatability with large SEM and MDC values. Kinematics at toe off demonstrated the lowest ICC values and largest measurement errors of all parameters (Range: ICC, 0.109 - 0.900; SEM, 0.8°- 5.7°; MDC, 2.5°- 15.7°). SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first study detailing the measurement error and minimal detectable change for discrete kinematic parameters of the trunk and pelvis during treadmill running. The reported values may provide a useful reference point for future studies investigating between-day differences in running kinematics.

Using the spring-mass model for running: Force-length curves and foot-strike patterns.

BACKGROUND: The spring-mass model is commonly used to investigate the mechanical characteristics of human running. Underlying this model is the assumption of a linear force-length relationship, during the stance phase of running, and the idea that stiffness can be characterised using a single spring constant. However, it remains unclear whether the assumption of linearity is valid across different running styles. RESEARCH QUESTION: How does the linearity of the force-length curve vary across a sample of runners and is there an association between force-length linearity and foot-strike index/speed? METHODS: Kinematic and kinetic data were collected from twenty-eight participants who ran overground at four speeds. The square of the Pearson's correlation coefficient, R2, was used to quantify linearity; with a threshold of R2 ≥ 0.95 selected to define linear behaviour. A linear mixed model was used to investigate the association between linearity and foot-strike index and speed. RESULTS: Only 36-46 % of participants demonstrated linear force-length behaviour across the four speeds during the loading phase. Importantly, the linear model showed a significant effect of both foot-strike index and speed on linearity during the loading phase (p = 0.003 and p < 0.001, respectively). SIGNIFICANCE: This study showed that the assumption of a linear force-length relationship is not appropriate for all runners. These findings suggest that the use of the spring-mass model, and a constant value of stiffness, may not be appropriate for characterising and comparing different running styles. Given these findings, it may be better to restrict the use of the spring-mass model to individuals who exhibit linear force-length dependence. It would also be appropriate for future studies, characterising stiffness using the spring-mass model, to report data on force-length linearity across the cohort under study.

Let's take the dog for a gait .

BACKGROUND: In 1872, Eadweard Muybridge was hired to research unsupported transit in horses, i.e. the trot and the gallop. This research was the first instance of the use of photography to analyse movement and was the ultimate precursor to motion capture for biomechanical assessment of movement utilised today. With the expansion of the field continuing, the term "gait" has become synonymous with walking and is often used interchangeably. In this editorial, we discuss the term "gait" and its' origin in the context of scientific research and aim to address the heterogeneous taxonomy associated with the ambiguous use of the term "gait". RESEARCH QUESTION: What is the ambiguous use of the term gait? METHODS: A non-systematic review was conducted of the original research and short communications in the 2019 issues of Gait and Posture RESULTS: A total of 219 titles were characterised as directly addressing locomotion. Of these, a total of 108 titles quantified the form of locomotion (e.g. walk/ing, run/ing) and 111 titles utilised the word "gait" to describe the task. However, 104 of these clarified the form of locomotion either within the abstract or the main text of the manuscript. SIGNIFICANCE: "Gait" is not mutually exclusive to humans nor walking. The ambiguity associated with the use of this term demonstrates the importance of quantifying the type of locomotion being studied. Ultimately, such efforts will allow the streamlining search strategies for appropriate research for academics, clinicians, and scientists alike.

A 10% Increase in Step Rate Improves Running Kinematics and Clinical Outcomes in Runners With Patellofemoral Pain at 4 Weeks and 3 Months.

BACKGROUND: Aberrant frontal-plane hip and pelvis kinematics have been frequently observed in runners with patellofemoral pain (PFP). Gait retaining interventions have been shown to improve running kinematics and may therefore be beneficial in runners with PFP. PURPOSE: To investigate whether a 10% increase in the running step rate influences frontal-plane kinematics of the hip and pelvis as well as clinical outcomes in runners with PFP. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Runners with PFP underwent a 3-dimensional gait analysis to confirm the presence of aberrant frontal-plane hip and/or pelvis kinematics at baseline. A total of 12 participants with frontal-plane hip and/or pelvis kinematics 1 standard deviation above a reference database were invited to undergo the gait retraining intervention. Running kinematics along with clinical outcomes of pain and functional outcomes were recorded at baseline, 4 weeks after retraining, and 3 months. Gait retraining consisted of a single session where step rate was increased by 10% using an audible metronome. Participants were asked to continue their normal running while self-monitoring their step rate using a global positioning system smartwatch and audible metronome. RESULTS: After gait retraining, significant improvements in running kinematics and clinical outcomes were observed at 4-week and 3-month follow-up. Repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc Bonferroni correction (P < .016) showed significant reductions in peak contralateral pelvic drop (mean difference [MD], 3.12° [95% CI, 1.88°-4.37°]), hip adduction (MD, 3.99° [95% CI, 2.01°-5.96°]), and knee flexion (MD, 4.09° [95% CI, 0.04°-8.15°]) as well as significant increases in self-reported weekly running volume (MD, 13.78 km [95% CI, 4.62-22.93 km]) and longest run pain-free (MD, 6.84 km [95% CI, 3.05-10.62 km]). Friedman test with a post hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed significant improvements on a numerical rating scale for worst pain in the past week and the Lower Extremity Functional Scale. CONCLUSION: A single session of gait retraining using a 10% increase in step rate resulted in significant improvements in running kinematics, pain, and function in runners with PFP. These improvements were maintained at 3-month follow-up. It is important to assess for aberrant running kinematics at baseline to ensure that gait interventions are targeted appropriately. REGISTRATION: NCT03067545 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Is There a Pathological Gait Associated With Common Soft Tissue Running Injuries?

BACKGROUND: Previous research has demonstrated clear associations between specific running injuries and patterns of lower limb kinematics. However, there has been minimal research investigating whether the same kinematic patterns could underlie multiple different soft tissue running injuries. If they do, such kinematic patterns could be considered global contributors to running injuries. HYPOTHESIS: Injured runners will demonstrate differences in running kinematics when compared with injury-free controls. These kinematic patterns will be consistent among injured subgroups. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: The authors studied 72 injured runners and 36 healthy controls. The injured group contained 4 subgroups of runners with either patellofemoral pain, iliotibial band syndrome, medial tibial stress syndrome, or Achilles tendinopathy (n = 18 each). Three-dimensional running kinematics were compared between injured and healthy runners and then between the 4 injured subgroups. A logistic regression model was used to determine which parameters could be used to identify injured runners. RESULTS: The injured runners demonstrated greater contralateral pelvic drop (CPD) and forward trunk lean at midstance and a more extended knee and dorsiflexed ankle at initial contact. The subgroup analysis of variance found that these kinematic patterns were consistent across each of the 4 injured subgroups. CPD was found to be the most important variable predicting the classification of participants as healthy or injured. Importantly, for every 1° increase in pelvic drop, there was an 80% increase in the odds of being classified as injured. CONCLUSION: This study identified a number of global kinematic contributors to common running injuries. In particular, we found injured runners to run with greater peak CPD and trunk forward lean as well as an extended knee and dorsiflexed ankle at initial contact. CPD appears to be the variable most strongly associated with common running-related injuries. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The identified kinematic patterns may prove beneficial for clinicians when assessing for biomechanical contributors to running injuries.

Are the arms and head required to accurately estimate centre of mass motion during running?

Accurate measurement of centre of mass (CoM) motion can provide valuable insight into the biomechanics of human running. However, full-body kinematic measurement protocols can be time consuming and difficult to implement. Therefore, this study was performed to understand whether CoM motion during running could be estimated from a model incorporating only lower extremity, pelvic and trunk segments. Full-body kinematic data was collected whilst (n=12) participants ran on a treadmill at two speeds (3.1 and 3.9ms-1). CoM trajectories from a full-body model (16-segments) were compared to those estimated from a reduced model (excluding the head and arms). The data showed that, provided an offset was included, it was possible to accurately estimate CoM trajectory in both the anterior-posterior and vertical direction, with root mean square errors of 5mm in both directions and close matches in waveform similarity (r=0.975-1.000). However, in the ML direction, there was a considerable difference in the CoM trajectories of the two models (r=0.774-0.767). This finding suggests that a full-body model is required if CoM motions are to be measured in the ML direction. The mismatch between the reduced and full-body model highlights the important contribution of the arms to CoM motion in the ML direction. We suggest that this control strategy, of using the arms rather than the heavier trunk segments to generate CoM motion, may lead to less variability in CoM motion in the ML direction and subsequently less variability in step width during human running.