Morgan Sara J, Friedly Janna L, Nelson Ian K, Rosen Rachael E, Humbert Andrew T, Hafner Brian J
Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Research Department, Gillette Children's, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA.
PM R. 2025 Apr;17(4):371-383. doi: 10.1002/pmrj.13321. Epub 2025 Feb 2.
Microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees (MPKs) improve safety, stability, and mobility for people with transfemoral amputation. Despite these benefits, MPKs are often not used for people in early rehabilitation.
To assess the feasibility of a study that compares MPKs and nonmicroprocessor knees (NMPKs) for people with recent transfemoral amputation and report on health outcomes after 3 months of use. Investigators hypothesized that MPK users would have better outcomes than NMPK users.
Pilot randomized controlled study.
Institutional laboratory.
Adults with recent unilateral transfemoral amputation, deemed ready for their first prosthesis, and weighed <125 kg. Eighteen participants enrolled; 15 completed the study.
Participants were randomized to use a MPK or NMPK in their first prosthesis.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Feasibility outcomes included recruitment, retention, and missing data. Health outcome measures included performance-based and self-reported measures of mobility, participation, step activity, and falls.
Eighteen of 24 planned participants enrolled in the study. Fifteen participants received a study prosthesis and completed the 3-month trial (MPK: n = 9; NMPK: n = 6). Participants with an MPK had significantly higher Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (p = .01, Hedges' g: 1.70), Activity-specific Balance Confidence (p = .01, Hedges' g: 1.75), and Return to Normal Living Index (p = .05, Hedges' g: 0.54) scores compared to patients with NMPK. No other outcomes significantly differed between groups; effect sizes (0.47-1.75) across mobility outcomes indicated better outcomes in the MPK group.
Enrollment goals were limited by the COVID-19 pandemic, but all 15 participants who received a study prosthesis finished the 3-month pilot study. The MPK group generally had better 3-month outcomes than the NMPK group, but few statistically significant differences were found due to the small sample size and heterogeneity within groups. Results from this pilot study can inform and power future studies that compare MPKs and NMPKs in early rehabilitation.
微处理器控制的假肢膝关节(MPK)可提高经股骨截肢患者的安全性、稳定性和行动能力。尽管有这些益处,但MPK在早期康复患者中使用并不普遍。
评估一项比较MPK与非微处理器控制膝关节(NMPK)对近期经股骨截肢患者效果的研究的可行性,并报告使用3个月后的健康结果。研究人员假设使用MPK的患者比使用NMPK的患者有更好的结果。
试点随机对照研究。
机构实验室。
近期单侧经股骨截肢的成年人,被认为已准备好使用首个假肢,体重<125千克。18名参与者入组;15名完成研究。
参与者被随机分配在首个假肢中使用MPK或NMPK。
可行性结局包括招募、留存率和缺失数据。健康结局指标包括基于表现和自我报告的行动能力、参与度、步数活动和跌倒情况的测量。
24名计划参与者中有18名入组。15名参与者接受了研究用假肢并完成了3个月的试验(MPK组:n = 9;NMPK组:n = 6)。与NMPK组患者相比,MPK组患者在假肢使用者行动能力调查(p = 0.01,Hedges' g:1.70)、特定活动平衡信心(p = 0.01,Hedges' g:1.75)和恢复正常生活指数(p = 0.05,Hedges' g:0.54)方面得分显著更高。两组之间的其他结局无显著差异;各行动能力结局的效应量(0.47 - 1.75)表明MPK组有更好的结果。
入组目标受COVID - 19大流行限制,但所有15名接受研究用假肢的参与者完成了3个月的试点研究。MPK组在3个月时的总体结果通常优于NMPK组,但由于样本量小和组内异质性,几乎未发现统计学上的显著差异。这项试点研究的结果可为未来比较MPK和NMPK在早期康复中效果的研究提供参考并提供统计学效力。