经胫骨截肢者的步态效率:能量储存和返回与固体踝关节缓冲后跟假肢脚。

Q Medicine
James Gardiner, Abu Zeeshan Bari, David Howard, Laurence Kenney
{"title":"经胫骨截肢者的步态效率:能量储存和返回与固体踝关节缓冲后跟假肢脚。","authors":"James Gardiner,&nbsp;Abu Zeeshan Bari,&nbsp;David Howard,&nbsp;Laurence Kenney","doi":"10.1682/JRRD.2015.04.0066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Energy storage and return (ESR) feet have long been assumed to promote metabolically efficient amputee gait. However, despite being prescribed for approximately 30 yr, there is limited evidence that they achieve this desired function. Here, we report a meta-analysis of data from 10 studies that met our selection criteria to determine whether amputee walking with ESR feet is more efficient than with conventional solid ankle cushioned heel (SACH) feet. Additionally, the data were tested for a relationship with walking speed since it has been suggested ESR feet might perform better at higher speeds. The raw data are highly variable because of differences in study protocols; therefore, we normalized the data and found a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) between ESR and SACH feet. However, the magnitude of this difference is small, with the cost of transport (COT) with ESR feet being 97.3% of the cost with SACH feet. No relationship between ESR COT and speed was found (p = 0.19). We hypothesize that the small but statistically significant difference between ESR and SACH feet may not constitute a functionally significant improvement in COT, possibly related to the limited push-off power provided by ESR feed compared with nondisabled ankles.</p>","PeriodicalId":50065,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development","volume":"53 6","pages":"1133-1138"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1682/JRRD.2015.04.0066","citationCount":"16","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Transtibial amputee gait efficiency: Energy storage and return versus solid ankle cushioned heel prosthetic feet.\",\"authors\":\"James Gardiner,&nbsp;Abu Zeeshan Bari,&nbsp;David Howard,&nbsp;Laurence Kenney\",\"doi\":\"10.1682/JRRD.2015.04.0066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Energy storage and return (ESR) feet have long been assumed to promote metabolically efficient amputee gait. However, despite being prescribed for approximately 30 yr, there is limited evidence that they achieve this desired function. Here, we report a meta-analysis of data from 10 studies that met our selection criteria to determine whether amputee walking with ESR feet is more efficient than with conventional solid ankle cushioned heel (SACH) feet. Additionally, the data were tested for a relationship with walking speed since it has been suggested ESR feet might perform better at higher speeds. The raw data are highly variable because of differences in study protocols; therefore, we normalized the data and found a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) between ESR and SACH feet. However, the magnitude of this difference is small, with the cost of transport (COT) with ESR feet being 97.3% of the cost with SACH feet. No relationship between ESR COT and speed was found (p = 0.19). We hypothesize that the small but statistically significant difference between ESR and SACH feet may not constitute a functionally significant improvement in COT, possibly related to the limited push-off power provided by ESR feed compared with nondisabled ankles.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50065,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development\",\"volume\":\"53 6\",\"pages\":\"1133-1138\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1682/JRRD.2015.04.0066\",\"citationCount\":\"16\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2015.04.0066\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2015.04.0066","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

摘要

长期以来,能量储存和返回(ESR)脚被认为是促进代谢效率截肢者的步态。然而,尽管服用了大约30年,但有限的证据表明它们达到了预期的功能。在这里,我们报告了一项对符合我们选择标准的10项研究数据的荟萃分析,以确定ESR足是否比传统的固体踝关节缓冲足(SACH)更有效。此外,研究人员还测试了这些数据与步行速度的关系,因为研究表明,ESR脚在更快的速度下可能表现得更好。由于研究方案的差异,原始数据变化很大;因此,我们将数据归一化,发现ESR和SACH脚之间存在统计学差异(p < 0.001)。然而,这种差异的幅度很小,ESR脚的运输成本(COT)是SACH脚成本的97.3%。ESR COT与车速无相关性(p = 0.19)。我们假设,ESR和SACH足部之间虽小但有统计学意义的差异可能并不构成COT在功能上的显著改善,这可能与ESR馈入提供的蹬离力与非残疾踝关节相比有限有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Transtibial amputee gait efficiency: Energy storage and return versus solid ankle cushioned heel prosthetic feet.

Energy storage and return (ESR) feet have long been assumed to promote metabolically efficient amputee gait. However, despite being prescribed for approximately 30 yr, there is limited evidence that they achieve this desired function. Here, we report a meta-analysis of data from 10 studies that met our selection criteria to determine whether amputee walking with ESR feet is more efficient than with conventional solid ankle cushioned heel (SACH) feet. Additionally, the data were tested for a relationship with walking speed since it has been suggested ESR feet might perform better at higher speeds. The raw data are highly variable because of differences in study protocols; therefore, we normalized the data and found a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) between ESR and SACH feet. However, the magnitude of this difference is small, with the cost of transport (COT) with ESR feet being 97.3% of the cost with SACH feet. No relationship between ESR COT and speed was found (p = 0.19). We hypothesize that the small but statistically significant difference between ESR and SACH feet may not constitute a functionally significant improvement in COT, possibly related to the limited push-off power provided by ESR feed compared with nondisabled ankles.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.64
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信