Yao Daiwei, Meyer-Kobbe Louisa, Ettinger Sarah, Claassen Leif, Altemeier-Sasse Anna, Sturm Christian, Kerling Arno, Stukenborg-Colsman Christina, Plaass Christian
ATOS Orthopedic Clinic Braunfels, Braunfels, Germany.
Department for Foot and Ankle Surgery, DIAKOVERE Annastift, Orthopedic clinic of the Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany.
Foot Ankle Orthop. 2023 May 19;8(2):24730114231172734. doi: 10.1177/24730114231172734. eCollection 2023 Apr.
Following below-knee surgery, the optimal medical mobility device remains controversial as adequate nonweightbearing of the operated extremity is critical to ensure successful healing. The use of forearm crutches (FACs) is well established but requires using both upper extremities. The hands-free single orthosis (HFSO) is an alternative that spares the upper extremities. This pilot study compared functional, spiroergometric, and subjective parameters between HFSO and FAC.
Ten healthy (5 females, 5 males) participants were asked to use HFSOs and FACs in a randomized order. Five functional tests were performed: climbing stairs (CS), an L-shaped indoor course (IC), an outdoor course (OC), a 10-meter walk test (10MWT), and a 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Tripping events were counted while performing IC, OC, and 6MWT. Spiroergometric measurements consisted of a 2-step treadmill test with speeds of 1.5 and 2 km/h, each for 3 minutes. Lastly, a VAS questionnaire was completed to collect data regarding comfort, safety, pain, and recommendations.
Significant differences between both aids were observed in CS and IC (HFSO: 29.3 seconds; FAC: 26.1 seconds, < .03; and HFSO: 33.2 seconds, FAC: 18 seconds, < .001, respectively). The other functional tests showed no significant differences. The trip events were not significantly different between the use of the 2 aids. Spiroergometric tests showed significant differences regarding heart rate (HFSO: 131.1 bpm at 1.5 km/h and 131 bpm at 2 km/h; FAC: 148.1 bpm at 1.5 km/h and 161.8 bpm at 2 km/h) and oxygen consumption (HFSO: 15.4 mL/min/kg at 1.5 km/h and 16 mL/min/kg at 2 km/h; FAC: 18.3 mL/min/kg at 1.5 km/h and 21.9 mL/min/kg at 2 km/h) at both speeds (all < .01). In addition, significantly different ratings regarding the items comfort, pain, and recommendation were recorded. Both aids were equally rated for safety.
HFSOs may be an alternative to FACs, especially in activities that require physical stamina. Further prospective studies in patients with below-knee surgical intervention concerning everyday clinical use would be interesting.
Level IV pilot-study.
在膝下手术后,最佳的医疗移动设备仍存在争议,因为手术肢体充分的非负重对于确保成功愈合至关重要。前臂拐杖(FACs)的使用已得到充分认可,但需要使用双上肢。免提单支矫形器(HFSO)是一种可使上肢得以 spared 的替代方案。这项前瞻性研究比较了 HFSO 和 FAC 在功能、心肺运动试验及主观参数方面的差异。
10 名健康参与者(5 名女性,5 名男性)被要求以随机顺序使用 HFSO 和 FAC。进行了五项功能测试:爬楼梯(CS)、L 形室内路线(IC)、室外路线(OC)、10 米步行测试(10MWT)和 6 分钟步行测试(6MWT)。在进行 IC、OC 和 6MWT 时计算绊倒事件的数量。心肺运动试验测量包括在跑步机上以 1.5 和 2 公里/小时的速度进行的两步测试,每个速度持续 3 分钟。最后,完成一份视觉模拟评分(VAS)问卷以收集有关舒适度、安全性、疼痛和建议的数据。
在 CS 和 IC 中观察到两种辅助器具之间存在显著差异(HFSO:29.3 秒;FAC:26.1 秒,P < 0.03;HFSO:33.2 秒,FAC:18 秒,P < 0.001)。其他功能测试未显示出显著差异。使用这两种辅助器具时绊倒事件没有显著差异。心肺运动试验显示在两个速度下心率(HFSO:1.5 公里/小时时为 131.1 次/分钟,2 公里/小时时为 131 次/分钟;FAC:1.5 公里/小时时为 148.1 次/分钟,2 公里/小时时为 161.8 次/分钟)和耗氧量(HFSO:1.5 公里/小时时为 15.4 毫升/分钟/千克,2 公里/小时时为 16 毫升/分钟/千克;FAC:1.5 公里/小时时为 18.3 毫升/分钟/千克,2 公里/小时时为 21.9 毫升/分钟/千克)均有显著差异(均 P < 0.01)。此外,在舒适度、疼痛和建议项目上记录到显著不同的评分。两种辅助器具在安全性方面的评分相同。
HFSO 可能是 FAC 的一种替代方案,尤其是在需要体力的活动中。关于膝下手术干预患者日常临床使用的进一步前瞻性研究将很有意义。
IV 级前瞻性研究。