People with transtibial amputations (TTAs) who use a powered ankle-foot prosthesis have equivalent metabolic costs and step-to-step transition work for level-ground walking over a range of speeds compared to non-amputees. The effects of using a powered compared to passive-elastic prosthesis for sloped walking are unknown. We sought to understand how the use of passive-elastic compared to powered ankle-foot prostheses affect metabolic cost and step-to-step transition work during sloped walking. Ten people (six M, four F) with TTAs walked 1.25 m s⁻¹ at 0°, ±3°, ±6° and ±9° using their own passive-elastic prosthesis and the BiOM powered ankle-foot prosthesis, while we measured metabolic rates, kinematics and kinetics. We calculated net metabolic power, individual leg step-to-step transition work and individual leg net work symmetry. The net metabolic power was 5% lower during walking on +3° and +6° uphill slopes when subjects used the BiOM compared to their passive-elastic prosthesis (p < 0.05). The use of the BiOM compared to a passive-elastic prosthesis did not affect individual leg step-to-step transition work (p > 0.05), but did improve individual leg net work symmetry on +6° and +9° uphill slopes (p < 0.01). People with TTAs who use a powered ankle-foot prosthesis have the potential to reduce metabolic costs and increase symmetry during walking on uphill slopes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Montgomery et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: