Halsne Elizabeth G, McDonald Cody L, Morgan Sara J, Cheever Sarah M, Hafner Brian J
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2018 Dec;42(6):583-591. doi: 10.1177/0309364618774060. Epub 2018 May 19.
: Crossover feet incorporate features of energy-storing feet and running-specific feet. As such, crossover feet may be suitable for both daily ambulation and participation in physically demanding activities.
: To compare crossover feet and energy-storing feet on performance-based tests including a range of low-level (e.g. sit-to-stand) and high-level (e.g. jogging) activities.
: Cross-sectional, repeated measures.
: Participants with transtibial amputation completed a battery of performance-based outcome measures, including the Five Times Sit-to-Stand, Timed-Up-and-Go, Four Square Step Test, and the Comprehensive High-level Activity Mobility Predictor. Participants wore duplicate prostheses fit with crossover feet and energy-storing feet to perform the tests; the order of foot conditions was randomized. Paired t tests were used to evaluate differences between feet and order of testing.
: Data from seven participants showed improvements in all measures while using crossover feet. Improvements in the second foot condition were also observed, indicating a practice effect for all measures. However, differences between feet and order of conditions were not statistically significant ( p > 0.05).
: Results of this study suggest that crossover feet may improve low- and high-level mobility outcomes. However, intervention effects are small and practice effects were observed in all outcomes. Future research is needed to evaluate the influence of practice effects on performance-based mobility measures.
Crossover feet may improve transtibial prosthesis users' performance compared to energy-storing feet across a range of activities, but additional research is needed. Practice effects may be an influential factor in the measurement of performance-based mobility outcomes and should be considered when performing a clinical assessment.
交叉式假脚融合了储能假脚和特定跑步假脚的特点。因此,交叉式假脚可能既适用于日常行走,也适用于参与体力要求较高的活动。
在包括一系列低强度(如从坐起到站立)和高强度(如慢跑)活动的基于性能的测试中,比较交叉式假脚和储能假脚。
横断面、重复测量。
经胫截肢参与者完成了一系列基于性能的结局测量,包括五次坐立试验、计时起立行走测试、四方步测试和综合高级活动移动性预测指标。参与者佩戴配有交叉式假脚和储能假脚的双侧假肢进行测试;假脚条件的顺序是随机的。配对t检验用于评估假脚之间以及测试顺序的差异。
七名参与者的数据显示,使用交叉式假脚时所有测量指标均有改善。在第二种假脚条件下也观察到了改善,表明所有测量指标都存在练习效应。然而,假脚之间以及条件顺序的差异无统计学意义(p>0.05)。
本研究结果表明,交叉式假脚可能改善低水平和高水平的移动性结局。然而,干预效果较小,且在所有结局中均观察到练习效应。未来需要开展研究来评估练习效应对基于性能的移动性测量的影响。
与储能假脚相比,交叉式假脚可能在一系列活动中改善经胫假肢使用者的表现,但仍需进一步研究。练习效应可能是基于性能的移动性结局测量中的一个影响因素,在进行临床评估时应予以考虑。