It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Ankle push-off power plays an important role in healthy walking, contributing to center-of-mass acceleration, swing leg dynamics, and accounting for 45% of total leg power. The majority of existing passive energy storage and return prostheses for people with below-knee (transtibial) amputation are stiffer than the biological ankle, particularly at slower walking speeds. Additionally, passive devices provide insufficient levels of energy return and push-off power, negatively impacting biomechanics of gait. Here, we present a clinical study evaluating the kinematics and kinetics of walking with a microprocessor-controlled, variable-stiffness ankle-foot prosthesis (945 g) compared to a standard low-mass passive prosthesis (Ottobock Taleo, 463 g) with 7 study participants having unilateral transtibial amputation. By modulating prosthesis stiffness under computer control across walking speeds, we demonstrate that there exists a stiffness that increases prosthetic-side energy return, peak power, and center-of-mass push-off work, and decreases contralateral limb peak ground reaction force compared to the standard passive prosthesis across all evaluated walking speeds. We demonstrate a significant increase in center-of-mass push-off work of 26.1%, 26.2%, 29.6% and 29.9% at 0.75 m/s, 1.0 m/s, 1.25 m/s, and 1.5 m/s, respectively, and a significant decrease in contralateral limb ground reaction force of 3.1%, 3.9%, and 3.2% at 1.0 m/s, 1.25 m/s, and 1.5 m/s, respectively. This study demonstrates the potential for a quasi-passive microprocessor-controlled variable-stiffness prosthesis to increase push-off power and energy return during gait at a range of walking speeds compared to a passive device of a fixed stiffness.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, K. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics, Cambridge, USA (GRID:grid.116068.8) (ISNI:0000 0001 2341 2786); Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Cambridge, USA (GRID:grid.116068.8) (ISNI:0000 0001 2341 2786); University of Calgary, Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Calgary, Canada (GRID:grid.22072.35) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 7697)
2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, K. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics, Cambridge, USA (GRID:grid.116068.8) (ISNI:0000 0001 2341 2786); Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Media Lab, Cambridge, USA (GRID:grid.116068.8) (ISNI:0000 0001 2341 2786)
3 Massachusetts Institute of Technology, K. Lisa Yang Center for Bionics, Cambridge, USA (GRID:grid.116068.8) (ISNI:0000 0001 2341 2786); Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Cambridge, USA (GRID:grid.116068.8) (ISNI:0000 0001 2341 2786)