Prinsen Erik C, Nederhand Marc J, Olsman Jeroen, Rietman Johan S
Roessingh Research and Development, The Netherlands Laboratory of Biomechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering Technology, University of Twente, The Netherlands
Roessingh Research and Development, The Netherlands.
Clin Rehabil. 2015 Jun;29(6):581-91. doi: 10.1177/0269215514552033. Epub 2014 Oct 6.
To study the influence of a transition from a non-microprocessor controlled to the Rheo Knee(®) II on quality of life, balance confidence and measures of mobility.
Randomised crossover trial.
Research department of a rehabilitation centre.
Persons with a transfemoral amputation or knee disarticulation (n=10).
Participants were assessed with their own non-microprocessor controlled knee and with the Rheo Knee(®) II. The low-profile Vari-Flex with EVO foot was installed in both knee conditions, followed by eight weeks of acclimatisation. The order in which knees were tested was randomised.
Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire with addendum, Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale, Timed "up & go" test, Timed up and down stairs test, Hill Assessment Index, Stairs Assessment Index, Standardized Walking Obstacle Course and One Leg Balance test.
Significant higher scores were found for the Rheo Knee(®) II on the Residual Limb Health subscale of the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire when compared to the non-microprocessor controlled prosthetic knee (median [interquartile range] resp. 86.67 [62.21-93.08] and 68.71 [46.15-94.83]; P=0.047) In addition, participants needed significantly more steps to complete an obstacle course when walking with the Rheo Knee(®) II compared to the non-microprocessor controlled prosthetic knee (median [interquartile range] resp. 23.50 [19.92-26.25] and 22.17 [19.50-25.75]; P=0.041). On other outcome measures, no significant differences were found.
Transition towards the Rheo Knee(®) II had little effect on the studied outcome measures.
研究从非微处理器控制的膝关节过渡到Rheo Knee(®) II对生活质量、平衡信心和活动能力指标的影响。
随机交叉试验。
一家康复中心的研究部门。
经股骨截肢或膝关节离断患者（n = 10）。
使用受试者自己的非微处理器控制膝关节和Rheo Knee(®) II对参与者进行评估。在两种膝关节情况下均安装了带有EVO足部的低轮廓Vari-Flex，随后进行八周的适应性训练。测试膝关节的顺序是随机的。
带附录的假体评估问卷、特定活动平衡信心量表、定时“起身走”测试、定时上下楼梯测试、希尔评估指数、楼梯评估指数、标准化步行障碍课程和单腿平衡测试。
与非微处理器控制的假肢膝关节相比，Rheo Knee(®) II在假体评估问卷的残肢健康子量表上的得分显著更高（中位数[四分位间距]分别为86.67 [62.21 - 93.08]和68.71 [46.15 - 94.83]；P = 0.047）。此外，与非微处理器控制的假肢膝关节相比，参与者使用Rheo Knee(®) II行走时完成障碍课程需要的步数显著更多（中位数[四分位间距]分别为23.50 [19.92 - 26.25]和22.17 [19.50 - 25.75]；P = 0.041）。在其他结果指标上，未发现显著差异。
向Rheo Knee(®) II的过渡对所研究的结果指标影响不大。
