Biomechanical characterization of the foot-ground interaction among Service members with unilateral transtibial limb loss performing unconstrained drop-landings: Effects of drop height and added mass. (11th October 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Elrod, Jonathan M.; Schnall, Barri L.; Mauntel, Timothy C.; Watson, Nora L.; Koehler-McNicholas, Sara R.; Nickel, Eric A.; Hansen, Andrew H.; Dearth, Christopher L.; Hendershot, Brad D.
• Is Part Of: Journal of biomechanics. Volume 127(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-10-11
• Subjects: Transtibial amputation -- Ankle–foot prosthesis -- Load carriage -- Impact -- Biomechanics; Animal mechanics -- Periodicals; Biomechanics -- Periodicals; Biomechanics -- Periodicals; Mécanique animale -- Périodiques; Biomécanique -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 571.4305
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110701
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0021-9290

Abstract

Abstract: There exist limited data to guide the development of methodologies for evaluating impact resilience of prosthetic ankle–foot systems, particularly regarding human-device interaction in ecologically valid scenarios. The purpose of this study was to biomechanically characterize foot–ground interactions during drop-landings among Service members with and without unilateral transtibial limb loss. Seven males with, and seven males without, unilateral transtibial limb loss completed six drop-landing conditions consisting of all combinations of three heights (20 cm, 40 cm, 60 cm) and two loads (with and without a 22.2 kg weighted vest). Peak ground reaction forces (GRF), vertical GRF loading rate and impulse, as well as ankle–foot, knee, and hip joint negative (absorption) powers and work were compared across groups (i.e., contralateral side and prosthetic side vs. uninjured controls) by height and load conditions. Loading occurred primarily in the vertical direction, and increased with increasing drop height and/or with added load. Vertical GRFs were overall ~ 15% smaller on the prosthetic side (vs. controls) with similar loading rates across limbs/groups. From the most challenging condition (i.e., 60 cm with 22 kg load), ankle–foot absorption energies on the prosthetic side were 64.6 (7.2) J; corresponding values were 187.4 (8.9) J for the contralateral limb and 161.2 (6.7) J among uninjured controls. Better understanding biomechanical responses to drop-landings in ecological scenarios will help inform future iterations of mechanical testing methodologies for evaluating impact resilience of prosthetic ankle–foot systems (enhancing prescription criteria and return-to-activity considerations) as well as identifying and mitigating risk factors for long-term secondary complications within the contralateral limb (e.g., joint degeneration).