Centre de Médecine Physique et de Réadaptation de la Tour de Gassies, 33523 Bruges Cedex, France.
Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2011 Oct;54(7):399-410. doi: 10.1016/j.rehab.2011.08.001. Epub 2011 Oct 1.
To compare the individual influence of different types of socket designs on the hip's range of motion in transfemoral amputees.
We studied the kinematic parameters of the hip joint for patients with transfemoral amputation under four experimental conditions: without a socket, with a quadrilateral socket, an ischial containment socket, an ischial-ramal containment socket. An opto-electronic system was used to record the movements in the frontal and sagittal planes for a 3D movement analysis.
The hip's range of motion is always significantly restricted with the sockets, regardless of their type, compared to the situation without a socket (P<0.05). The adduction and extension movements are the most restricted. The global amplitude (i.e., the sum of all the ranges of motion) is significantly higher for the ischial-ramal containment socket (139.5°) compared to the ischial containment socket (125.4°, P=0.002) and the quadrilateral socket (127.3°, P=0.01). No comparable study exists in the literature, especially for the ischial-ramal containment socket.
The ischial-ramal containment socket seems to be the most interesting type of socket in terms of the criterion studied. It still remains to identify the possible functional improvements that this design would provoke during gait and during daily activities.
比较不同类型接受腔设计对股骨截肢患者髋关节活动范围的个体影响。
我们研究了四种实验条件下股骨截肢患者髋关节的运动学参数：无接受腔、四边形接受腔、坐骨包容接受腔、坐骨-耻骨包容接受腔。使用光电系统记录 3D 运动分析中的额状面和矢状面运动。
与无接受腔情况相比（P<0.05），无论接受腔类型如何，髋关节活动范围始终受到显著限制。内收和伸展运动受限最明显。坐骨-耻骨包容接受腔的总活动幅度（即所有运动范围的总和）明显高于坐骨包容接受腔（139.5°）（P=0.002）和四边形接受腔（127.3°）（P=0.01）。文献中尚无类似的研究，特别是关于坐骨-耻骨包容接受腔。
就所研究的标准而言，坐骨-耻骨包容接受腔似乎是最有趣的接受腔类型。仍需确定这种设计在步态和日常活动中可能引起的功能改善。
