Energy storage and release of prosthetic feet: Part 2. Subjective ratings of 2 energy storing and 2 conventional feet, user choice of foot and deciding factor

K. Postema, H.J. Hermens, J. de Vries, H.F.J.M. Koopman, W.H. Eisma

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

45 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper is the second part of a study on biomechanical and functional properties of prosthetic feet. The first part dealt with a biomechanical analysis related to user benefits. This part deals with subjective ratings and deciding factors for trans-tibial amputees using 2 energy storing feet (ESF) and 2 conventional feet (CF). The Otto Bock Dynamic Pro and Hanger Quantum feet were used as ESF and the Otto Bock Multi Axial and Otto Bock Lager feet were used as CF. Ten trans-tibial amputees, active walkers, without stump problems, were selected (mean age: 49 years old). The study was designed as a double-blind, randomised trial and for each foot there was a habituation period of 2 weeks. Two questionnaires were designed. (A) concerned information about the preference of the subjects and (B) concerned the order of importance of difference aspects concerning a prosthesis. Results indicated that no clear preference for either the ESF or the CF existed and that the individual preference is not related to age. The items ‘ability to walk fast’ and ‘no fatigue during walking’, score statistically significantly worse for the CF2. With the small contrast between the ESF and CF, in relation to energy storing capacities, the subjects cannot distinguish between the ESF and CF. The ‘absence of stump pain’ and ‘stability while walking’ are ranked as most important aspects concerning a prosthesis. The perception of stability is likely to be related to the level and kind of activities the subject performs.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)28-34
JournalProsthetics and orthotics international
Volume21
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1997

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Energy storage and release of prosthetic feet: Part 2. Subjective ratings of 2 energy storing and 2 conventional feet, user choice of foot and deciding factor'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this