A research team compared ischial ramus containment, dynamic socket, and subischial interface designs in regard to gait, balance, mobility, and preference. The authors hypothesized that more active users may experience benefits from the less intrusive dynamic socket and subischial designs.
People with unilateral transfemoral amputations with at least one year of prosthesis use experience, independent community ambulatory status, 18 to 60 years of age, of any race or ethnicity, with a body mass of 45-125kg, and with a self-reported ability to walk for 20 minutes continuously were included in the study. Each participant was fit in each interface design. Thirteen participants completed the clinical trial.
The researchers found that velocity, cadence, mobility, and balance were not statistically different between the three socket conditions. The dynamic socket demonstrated significantly greater symmetry in swing, stance, single support percentage, and toe angle compared with ischial ramus containment and subischial designs. Sixty days after the study’s completion, seven participants changed interfaces, trending away from ischial ramus containment prostheses, the study said.
Although large differences were not observed between the interface designs, the authors concluded that small differences in spatiotemporal gait measures combined with patient preference may make a meaningful difference to individual patients and should be considered.
The study, “Effect of transfemoral prosthetic socket interface design on gait, balance, mobility, and preference: A randomized clinical trial,” was published in Prosthetics and Orthotics International.
