Product Gallery Elanic

Microprocessor feet improve prosthetic mobility and physical function relative to non-microprocessor feet

PubMed logo

Journal of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies Engineering
Volume 9, January-December 2022
Article Reuse Guidelines

PLEASE DOWNLOAD THE ENTIRE PAPER HEREPDF download icon

___________________________

Microprocessor feet improve prosthetic mobility and physical function relative to non-microprocessor feet


Eric L Weber1, Phillip M Stevens https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3488-07071,2, Dwiesha L England https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4274-53561, Vahness D Swilley1, and Shane R Wurdeman1,3

 

Abstract

Introduction: The clinical benefits associated with the microprocessor regulation of prosthetic ankle position and resistance have largely been reported through manufacturer conducted research in controlled laboratory environments. Measures with greater ecological validity are needed. This study aimed to understand if there are differences in physical function and mobility outcomes as patients transitioned from a non-Microprocessor to Microprocessor Feet. 

Method: A retrospective analysis of patient outcomes was performed. Patient-reported benefits associated with the adoption of such prosthetic foot-ankle mechanisms were collected from 23 individuals through the longitudinal use of a custom short form of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function and individual items from the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire. 

Results: The impact of Microprocessor Feet upon physical function and mobility were observed in a significant increase in physical function (mean increase in t-score of 5.4 ± 1.25; p = .0004) and significant improvements in several mobility items. 

Conclusions: Collectively, these measures support the beneficial impact of Microprocessor Feet on improving socket comfort, reducing back pain, improving sit to stand transfers and enhancing hill ascent and descent as well as stair negotiation.
Keywords
Patient reported outcomes measurement information system, prosthesis evaluation questionnaire, microprocessor feet, lower limb prosthesis, amputation

1Hanger Institute for Clinical Research and Education, Austin, TX, USA
2Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
3Department of Biomechanics, University of Nebraska at Omaha, Omaha, NE, USA
Corresponding author(s):
Phillip M Stevens, Hanger Institute for Clinical Research and Education, 10910 Domain Dr, Austin 78758, TX, USA. Email: [email protected]

PLEASE DOWNLOAD THE ENTIRE PAPER HERE