Mechanical testing of transtibial prosthetic sockets: A discussion paper from the American Orthotic and Prosthetic Association Socket Guidance Workgroup. Issue 1 (9th February 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gariboldi, Francesca; Cutti, Andrea Giovanni; Fatone, Stefania; Nickel, Eric; Dickinson, Alex; Steer, Joshua; Erenstone, Jeffrey; Zahedi, Saeed
• Is Part Of: Prosthetics and orthotics international. Volume 47:Issue 1(2023)
• Page Start: 3
• Page End: 12
• Publication Date: 2023-02-09
• Subjects: prosthetic socket -- testing -- lower limb; Orthopedic apparatus -- Periodicals; Prosthesis -- Periodicals; Implants, Artificial -- Periodicals; 617.905
• DOI: 10.1097/PXR.0000000000000222
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0309-3646

Abstract

Abstract : Background: The advent of novel manufacturing technologies, materials, and socket design concepts could introduce risks to prosthetic limb users, as the existing knowledge base for safe fabrication may not apply. Moreover, although structural test standards exist for mass-produced prosthetic components, they are not applicable to prosthetic sockets. Methods: The "AOPA Socket Guidance Workgroup" was formed in 2020 to provide the prosthetic community with evidence-based clinical best practices and methods in the field of prosthetic socket structural analysis. This multidisciplinary expert workgroup undertook a critical analysis of the knowledge gaps regarding the requirements for mechanical testing of lower limb prosthetic sockets. Results: The Workgroup identified knowledge gaps in 4 domains. Domain 1 describes the shape and composition of a mock residual limb, required to support and generate in vivo representative loading within the socket. Domain 2 concerns prosthetic socket coordinate systems and alignment. Domain 3 regards the components and requirements of test specimens. Finally, Domain 4 considers test conditions, loading parameters, and acceptance criteria. Conclusions: This paper describes these knowledge gaps in detail and recommends potential solution approaches based on literature review, group consensus around existing knowledge, or the formation of new study groups to fill each knowledge gap. Our intent is for the recommendations arising from this paper to support the community (e.g., researchers in the clinic, academia, industry, and funders) in addressing these knowledge gaps.