Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg® and Mauch SNS® prosthetic knees

240Citations
Citations of this article
425Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The C-Leg® (Otto Bock, Duderstadt, Germany) is a microprocessor- controlled prosthetic knee that may enhance amputee gait. This intrasubject randomized study compared the gait biomechanics of transfemoral amputees wearing the C-Leg® with those wearing a common noncomputerized prosthesis, the Mauch SNS® (Ossur, Reykjavik, Iceland). After subjects had a 3-month acclimation period with each prosthetic knee, typical gait biomechanical data were collected in a gait laboratory. At a controlled walking speed (CWS), peak swing phase knee-flexion angle decreased for the C-Leg® group compared with the Mauch SNS® group (55.2° ± 6.5° vs 64.41° ± 5.8°, respectively; p = 0.005); the C-Leg® group was similar to control subjects' peak swing knee-flexion angle (56.0° ± 3.4°). Stance knee-flexion moment increased for the C-Leg® group compared with the Mauch SNS® group (0.142 ± 0.05 vs 0.067 ± 0.07 N·m, respectively; p = 0.01), but remained significantly reduced compared with control subjects (0.477 ± 0.1 N·m). Prosthetic limb step length at CWS was less for the C-Leg® group compared with the Mauch SNS® group (0.66 ± 0.04 vs 0.70 ± 0.06 m, respectively; p = 0.005), which resulted in increased symmetry between limbs for the C-Leg® group. Subjects also walked faster with the C-Leg® versus the Mauch SNS® (1.30 ± 0.1 vs 1.21 ± 0.1 m/s, respectively; p = 0.004). The C-Leg® prosthetic limb vertical ground reaction force decreased compared with the Mauch SNS® (96.3 ± 4.7 vs 100.3 ± 7.5 % body weight, respectively; p = 0.0092).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Segal, A. D., Orendurff, M. S., Klute, G. K., McDowell, M. L., Pecoraro, J. A., Shofer, J., & Czerniecki, J. M. (2006). Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg® and Mauch SNS® prosthetic knees. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 43(7), 857–870. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2005.09.0147

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free