The effect of carbon fiber custom dynamic orthosis use and design on center of pressure progression and perceived smoothness in individuals with lower limb trauma
Sapna Sharma , Kirsten M. Anderson , Molly S. Pacha , Kierra J. Falbo , Clare Severe , Andrew H. Hansen , Brad D. Hendershot , Jason M. Wilken , CARBon Fiber Orthosis Research Network (CARBON)
{"title":"The effect of carbon fiber custom dynamic orthosis use and design on center of pressure progression and perceived smoothness in individuals with lower limb trauma","authors":"Sapna Sharma , Kirsten M. Anderson , Molly S. Pacha , Kierra J. Falbo , Clare Severe , Andrew H. Hansen , Brad D. Hendershot , Jason M. Wilken , CARBon Fiber Orthosis Research Network (CARBON)","doi":"10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2024.106284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Carbon-fiber custom dynamic orthoses are used to improve gait and limb function following lower limb trauma in specialty centers. However, the effects of commercially available orthoses on center of pressure progression and patient perception of orthosis smoothness during walking are poorly understood.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In total, 16 participants with a unilateral lower extremity traumatic injury underwent gait analysis when walking without an orthosis, and while wearing monolithic and modular devices, in a randomized order. Device alignment, stiffness, participant rating of perceived device smoothness, center of pressure velocity, and ankle zero moment crossing were assessed.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>The modular device was approximately twice as stiff as the monolithic device. Alignment, smoothness ratings, peak magnitude of center of pressure velocity, and zero moment crossing were not different between study devices. The time to peak center of pressure velocity occurred significantly later for the modular device compared to the monolithic and no orthosis conditions, with large effect sizes observed.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>Commercially available orthoses commonly used to treat limb trauma affect the timing of center of pressure progression relative to walking without an orthosis. Despite multiple design differences, monolithic and modular orthoses included in this study did not differ with respect to other measures of center of pressure progression. Perceived smoothness ratings were approximately 40% greater with the study orthoses as compared to previous studies in specialty centers, which may be due to a more gradual center of pressure progression, as indicted by lower peak magnitude of center of pressure velocity with both study orthoses.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50992,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Biomechanics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Biomechanics","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268003324001165","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Carbon-fiber custom dynamic orthoses are used to improve gait and limb function following lower limb trauma in specialty centers. However, the effects of commercially available orthoses on center of pressure progression and patient perception of orthosis smoothness during walking are poorly understood.
Methods
In total, 16 participants with a unilateral lower extremity traumatic injury underwent gait analysis when walking without an orthosis, and while wearing monolithic and modular devices, in a randomized order. Device alignment, stiffness, participant rating of perceived device smoothness, center of pressure velocity, and ankle zero moment crossing were assessed.
Findings
The modular device was approximately twice as stiff as the monolithic device. Alignment, smoothness ratings, peak magnitude of center of pressure velocity, and zero moment crossing were not different between study devices. The time to peak center of pressure velocity occurred significantly later for the modular device compared to the monolithic and no orthosis conditions, with large effect sizes observed.
Interpretation
Commercially available orthoses commonly used to treat limb trauma affect the timing of center of pressure progression relative to walking without an orthosis. Despite multiple design differences, monolithic and modular orthoses included in this study did not differ with respect to other measures of center of pressure progression. Perceived smoothness ratings were approximately 40% greater with the study orthoses as compared to previous studies in specialty centers, which may be due to a more gradual center of pressure progression, as indicted by lower peak magnitude of center of pressure velocity with both study orthoses.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Biomechanics is an international multidisciplinary journal of biomechanics with a focus on medical and clinical applications of new knowledge in the field.
The science of biomechanics helps explain the causes of cell, tissue, organ and body system disorders, and supports clinicians in the diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of treatment methods and technologies. Clinical Biomechanics aims to strengthen the links between laboratory and clinic by publishing cutting-edge biomechanics research which helps to explain the causes of injury and disease, and which provides evidence contributing to improved clinical management.
A rigorous peer review system is employed and every attempt is made to process and publish top-quality papers promptly.
Clinical Biomechanics explores all facets of body system, organ, tissue and cell biomechanics, with an emphasis on medical and clinical applications of the basic science aspects. The role of basic science is therefore recognized in a medical or clinical context. The readership of the journal closely reflects its multi-disciplinary contents, being a balance of scientists, engineers and clinicians.
The contents are in the form of research papers, brief reports, review papers and correspondence, whilst special interest issues and supplements are published from time to time.
Disciplines covered include biomechanics and mechanobiology at all scales, bioengineering and use of tissue engineering and biomaterials for clinical applications, biophysics, as well as biomechanical aspects of medical robotics, ergonomics, physical and occupational therapeutics and rehabilitation.