PDF herunterladen
Int J Sports Med 2014; 35(14): 1223-1228
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1382056
Clinical Sciences
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Energy Costs & Performance of Transtibial Amputees & Non-amputees during Walking & Running

L. J. Mengelkoch
1   Doctor of Physical Therapy Program, University of St. Augustine for Health Sciences, St. Augustine, United States
,
J. T. Kahle
2   School of Physical Therapy & Rehabilitation Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, United States
,
M. J. Highsmith
2   School of Physical Therapy & Rehabilitation Sciences, University of South Florida, Tampa, United States
3   Center for Neuromusculoskeletal Research, University of South Florida, Tampa, United States
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf



accepted after revision 05. Mai 2014

Publikationsdatum:
21. August 2014 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

This study compared energy costs and performance differences of walking and running for transtibial amputee (TTA) and matched non-amputee runners. TTA were tested with 3 prosthetic feet: traditional foot, SACH; general purpose, energy storing and return (ESAR) foot, Renegade; running-specific ESAR foot, Nitro. During walking, VO2 and gait efficiency (GE) were similar between prosthetic feet. VO2 was increased (21–33%) and GE was decreased for TTA compared to controls. Self-selected walking speed (SSWS) was slower for SACH (4–6%) compared to Renegade and Nitro but SSWS for TTA was slower (16–22%) than controls. During running, VO2 was increased (8–18%) and GE was decreased using SACH and Renegade, compared to Nitro. During running, VO2 was greater (9–38%), GE was decreased and SSRS was slower (17–30%) for TTA, than controls. VO2 peak was similar for controls and TTA using Nitro, but peak running speed was slower for TTA. In conclusion, during walking energy costs are mostly similar between prosthetic feet, but ESAR feet likely provide faster SSWS for TTA. During running, energy costs and performance are improved for TTA using Nitro. Nonetheless, for all prosthetic feet conditions, TTA demonstrated an energy cost and performance disadvantage during walking and running compared to non-amputee runners.

Key words

carbon fiber prosthetic feet - energy storing and return prosthetic feet - gait efficiency
 

  • References

  • 1 Brown MB, Millard-Stafford ML, Allison AR. Running-specific prostheses permit energy cost similar to nonamputees. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2009; 41: 1080-1087
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Buhi ER, Goodson P, Neilands TB. Out of sight, not out of mind: strategies for handling missing data. Am J Health Behav 2008; 32: 83-92
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Doig GS, Simpson F. Randomization and allocation concealment: a practical guide for researchers. J Crit Care 2005; 20: 187-191
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Edelstein JE. Prosthetic feet: state of the art. Phys Ther 1988; 68: 1874-1881
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Gailey RS, Wenger MA, Raya M, Kirk N, Erbs K, Spyropoulos P, Nash MS. Energy expenditure of trans-tibial amputees during ambulation at self-selected pace. J Prosthet Orthot 1994; 18: 84-91
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Harriss DJ, Atkinson G. Ethical standards in sports and exercise science research: 2014 update. Int J Sports Med. 2013 34. 1025-1028
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Hartung DM, Touchette D. Overview of clinical research design. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 2009; 66: 398-408
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Hsu M-J, Nielsen DH, Lin-Chan S-J, Shurr D. The effects of prosthetic foot design on physiologic measurements, self-selected walking velocity, and physical activity in people with transtibial amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87: 123-129
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Hsu M-J, Nielsen DH, Yack HJ, Shurr DG. Physiological measurements of walking and running in people with transtibial amputations with 3 different prostheses. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1999; 29: 526-533
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Hsu M-J, Nielsen DH, Yack J, Shurr DG, Lin S-J. Physiological comparisons of physically active persons with transtibial amputation using static and dynamic prostheses versus persons with nonpathological gait during multiple-speed walking. J Prosthet Orthot 2000; 12: 60-69
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Kang M, Ragan BG, Park JH. Issues in outcomes research: an overview of randomization techniques for clinical trials. J Athl Train 2008; 43: 215-221
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Kram R, Grabowski AM, McGowan CP, Brown MB, Herr HM. Counterpoint: Artificial legs do not make artificially fast running speeds possible. J Appl Physiol 2010; 108: 1012-1014
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Mann CJ. Observational research methods. Research design II: cohort, cross Sectional, and case-control studies. Emerg Med J 2003; 20: 54-60
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Nielsen DH, Shurr DG, Golden JC, Meier K. Comparison of energy cost and gait efficiency during ambulation in below-knee amputees using different prosthetic feet – a preliminary report. J Prosthet Orthot 1988; 1: 24-31
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Nolan L. Carbon fibre prostheses and running in amputees: a review. Foot Ankle Surg 2008; 14: 125-129
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Noordzij M, Dekker F, Zoccali C, Jager KJ. Study Designs in Clinical Research. Nephron Clin Pract 2009; 113: c218-c221
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Unnebrink K, Windeler J. Intention-to-treat: methods for dealing with missing values in clinical trials of progressively deteriorating diseases. Stat Med 2001; 20: 3931-3946
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Vandenbroucke JP, von Elm E, Altman DG, Gotzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, Poole C, Schlesselman JJ, Egger M. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 2007; 4: e297
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Waters RL, Mulroy SJ. Energy expenditure of walking in individuals with lower limb amputations. In: Michael JW, Bowker JH, Smith DG. eds Atlas of Amputations and Limb Deficiencies. Surgical, Prosthetic and Rehabilitation Principles. 3rd ed. Rosemont, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 2004: 395-407
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Weyand PG, Bundle MW. Point: Artificial limbs do make artificially fast running speeds possible. J Appl Physiol 2010; 108: 1011-1012
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 Weyand PG, Bundle MW, McGowan CP, Grabowski A, Brown MB, Kram R, Herr H. The fastest runner on artificial legs: different limbs, similar function?. J Appl Physiol 2009; 107: 903-911
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar