Obstacle course: Users’ maneuverability and movement efficiency when using Otto Bock C-Leg, Otto Bock 3R60, and CaTech SNS prosthetic knee joints

The performance and movement efficiency of prosthesis users while traversing a multisectional obstacle course (OC) were evaluated using a crossover design with random allocation of three prosthetic knee joints: the SNS (CaTech; Dayton, Ohio) the C-Leg (Otto Bock; Duderstadt, Germany), and the 3R60 (Otto Bock). Twelve users completed the OC twice with each joint, once without and once with a mental loading task (MLT). The performance was objectively assessed using time measurement from digital video recordings, and the Total Heart Beat Index was used to estimate movement efficiency. A 1 mo familiarization period was provided for each knee joint before data collection. It took longer to complete the OC with the 3R60 compared with either the SNS or the C-Leg. No significant time differences were found between the C-Leg and the SNS, but differences between the 3R60 and the SNS (slalom and rock sections) and between the 3R60 and the C-Leg (rock section) were observed. Within the simulated sand section, two participants fell with the C-Leg, one with the 3R60, and none with the SNS. Movement efficiency without MLT was similar between all joints, but with an MLT a significant decrease in movement efficiency was observed with the C-Leg. Previous experience using an SNS had no influence on the results

How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRR’s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program

Crowd-sourced amputee gait data : a feasibility study using YouTube videos of unilateral trans-femoral gait

Collecting large datasets of amputee gait data is notoriously difficult. Additionally, collecting data on less prevalent amputations or on gait activities other than level walking and running on hard surfaces is rarely attempted. However, with the wealth of user-generated content on the Internet, the scope for collecting amputee gait data from alternative sources other than traditional gait labs is intriguing. Here we investigate the potential of YouTube videos to provide gait data on amputee walking. We use an example dataset of trans-femoral amputees level walking at self-selected speeds to collect temporal gait parameters and calculate gait asymmetry. We compare our YouTube data with typical literature values, and show that our methodology produces results that are highly comparable to data collected in a traditional manner. The similarity between the results of our novel methodology and literature values lends confidence to our technique. Nevertheless, clear challenges with the collection and interpretation of crowd-sourced gait data remain, including long term access to datasets, and a lack of validity and reliability studies in this area

Validity and reliability of a novel 3D scanner for assessment of the shape and volume of amputees’ residual limb models

Objective assessment methods to monitor residual limb volume following lower-limb amputation are required to enhance practitioner-led prosthetic fitting. Computer aided systems, including 3D scanners, present numerous advantages and the recent Artec Eva scanner, based on laser free technology, could potentially be an effective solution for monitoring residual limb volumes. The aim of this study was to assess the validity and reliability of the Artec Eva scanner (practical measurement) against a high precision laser 3D scanner (criterion measurement) for the determination of residual limb model shape and volume. Three observers completed three repeat assessments of ten residual limb models, using both the scanners. Validity of the Artec Eva scanner was assessed (mean percentage error <2%) and Bland-Altman statistics were adopted to assess the agreement between the two scanners. Intra and inter-rater reliability (repeatability coefficient <5%) of the Artec Eva scanner was calculated for measuring indices of residual limb model volume and shape (i.e. residual limb cross sectional areas and perimeters). Residual limb model volumes ranged from 885 to 4399 ml. Mean percentage error of the Artec Eva scanner (validity) was 1.4% of the criterion volumes. Correlation coefficients between the Artec Eva and the Romer determined variables were higher than 0.9. Volume intra-rater and inter-rater reliability coefficients were 0.5% and 0.7%, respectively. Shape percentage maximal error was 2% at the distal end of the residual limb, with intra-rater reliability coefficients presenting the lowest errors (0.2%), both for cross sectional areas and perimeters of the residual limb models. The Artec Eva scanner is a valid and reliable method for assessing residual limb model shapes and volumes. While the method needs to be tested on human residual limbs and the results compared with the current system used in clinical practice, it has the potential to quantify shape and volume fluctuations with greater resolution

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions.

BACKGROUND: Assistive products are items which allow older people and people with disabilities to be able to live a healthy, productive and dignified life. It has been estimated that approximately 1.5% of the world's population need a prosthesis or orthosis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to systematically identify and review the evidence from randomized controlled trials assessing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions. METHODS: Literature searches, completed in September 2015, were carried out in fourteen databases between years 1995 and 2015. The search results were independently screened by two reviewers. For the purpose of this manuscript, only randomized controlled trials which examined interventions using orthotic or prosthetic devices were selected for data extraction and synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 342 randomised controlled trials were identified (319 English language and 23 non-English language). Only 4 of these randomised controlled trials examined prosthetic interventions and the rest examined orthotic interventions. These orthotic interventions were categorised based on the medical conditions/injuries of the participants. From these studies, this review focused on the medical condition/injuries with the highest number of randomised controlled trials (osteoarthritis, fracture, stroke, carpal tunnel syndrome, plantar fasciitis, anterior cruciate ligament, diabetic foot, rheumatoid and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, ankle sprain, cerebral palsy, lateral epicondylitis and low back pain). The included articles were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Details of the clinical population examined, the type of orthotic/prosthetic intervention, the comparator/s and the outcome measures were extracted. Effect sizes and odds ratios were calculated for all outcome measures, where possible. CONCLUSIONS: At present, for prosthetic and orthotic interventions, the scientific literature does not provide sufficient high quality research to allow strong conclusions on their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness

The development and reliability testing of the Functional Lower-Limb Amputee Gait Assessment

Objective The study purpose was three-fold: (a) to describe the development of the Functional Lower-Limb Amputee Gait Assessment, (b) to determine its reliability with two groups of raters, physical therapists, and certified prosthetists, and (c) to determine the agreement on its results between the two groups. Design A reliability study. Setting Institution for higher education. Participants Five physical therapists and five certified prosthetists. Intervention Not applicable. Main measure The gait of people with unilateral lower limb amputation was evaluated using the Functional Lower-Limb Amputee Gait Assessment. Kappa statistic was used to analyze reliability. Results The intra-rater reliability of nine gait deviations in the physical therapists’ group and eight in the certified prosthetists’ group was between moderate and almost perfect agreement (kappa = .41–1). In the physical therapists’ group, the inter-rater reliability of four gait deviations was moderate (kappa = .41–.6). In the certified prosthetists’ group, the inter-rater reliability of six gait deviations was moderate to substantial (kappa = .41–.8). Three gait deviations achieved moderate agreement in both groups of clinicians (kappa = .41–.6). Conclusions Most gait deviations included in the Functional Lower-Limb Amputee Gait Assessment appear stable over time when used by the same clinician. Six gait deviations in the certified prosthetists’ group and four in the physical therapists’ group may be used by multiple clinicians, and three gait deviations may be used across both professions to assist in communication and collaboration on the best course of treatment for a patient with a unilateral lower limb amputation

Risk Factors That Increase Risk of Estrogen Receptor-Positive and -Negative Breast Cancer.

BackgroundRisk factors may differentially influence development of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive vs -negative breast cancer. We examined associations with strong, prevalent risk factors by ER subtype.MethodsOf 1 279 443 women age 35 to 74 years participating in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium, 14 969 developed ER-positive and 3617 developed ER-negative invasive breast cancer. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) using Cox regression and compared ER subtype hazard ratios at representative ages or by menopausal status using Wald tests. All statistical tests were two-sided.ResultsFor women age 40 years, compared with no prior biopsy, ER-positive vs ER-negative HRs were 1.53 (95% CI = 1.30 to 1.81) vs 1.26 (95% CI = 0.90 to 1.76) for nonproliferative disease, 1.63 (95% CI = 1.23 to 2.17) vs 1.41 (95% CI = 0.78 to 2.57) for proliferative disease without atypia, and 4.47 (95% CI = 2.88 to 6.96) vs 0.20 (95% CI = 0.02 to 2.51) for proliferative disease with atypia. Benign disease proliferation risk was stronger for ER-positive than ER-negative cancer for women age 35 years (Wald P = .04), age 40 years (Wald P = .04), and age 50 years (Wald P = .06). Among pre/perimenopausal women, body mass index (BMI) had a stronger association with ER-negative than ER-positive cancer (obese II/III vs. normal weight: HR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.19 to 1.94; vs 1.21, 95% CI = 1.08 to 1.36). Increasing BMI similarly increased ER-positive and ER-negative cancer risk among postmenopausal hormone users (Wald P = .15) and nonusers&nbsp;(Wald P = .08). Associations with ER subtype varied by race/ethnicity across all ages (P &lt; .001) and by family history of breast cancer and breast density for specific ages.ConclusionsStrength of risk factor associations differed by ER subtype. Separate risk models for ER subtypes may improve identification of women for targeted prevention strategies