Walking with unilateral ankle-foot unloading: a comparative biomechanical analysis of three assistive devices.
Ankle-foot orthosis (AFO)
Crutches
Gait analysis
Gait rehabilitation
Hands-free crutch
Joint kinematics
Metabolic cost
Non-weight-bearing
knee crutch
Journal
Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation
ISSN: 1743-0003
Titre abrégé: J Neuroeng Rehabil
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101232233
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Apr 2024
30 Apr 2024
Historique:
received:
30
11
2023
accepted:
05
03
2024
medline:
1
5
2024
pubmed:
1
5
2024
entrez:
30
4
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Foot and ankle unloading is essential in various clinical contexts, including ulcers, tendon ruptures, and fractures. Choosing the right assistive device is crucial for functionality and recovery. Yet, research on the impact of devices beyond crutches, particularly ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) designed to unload the ankle and foot, is limited. This study investigates the effects of three types of devices-forearm crutches, knee crutch, and AFO-on biomechanical, metabolic, and subjective parameters during walking with unilateral ankle-foot unloading. Twenty healthy participants walked at a self-selected speed in four conditions: unassisted able-bodied gait, and using three unloading devices, namely forearm crutches, iWalk knee crutch, and ZeroG AFO. Comprehensive measurements, including motion capture, force plates, and metabolic system, were used to assess various spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, and metabolic parameters. Additionally, participants provided subjective feedback through questionnaires. The conditions were compared using a within-subject crossover study design with repeated measures ANOVA. Significant differences were found between the three devices and able-bodied gait. Among the devices, ZeroG exhibited significantly faster walking speed and lower metabolic cost. For the weight-bearing leg, ZeroG exhibited the shortest stance phase, lowest braking forces, and hip and knee angles most similar to normal gait. However, ankle plantarflexion after push-off using ZeroG was most different from normal gait. IWalk and crutches caused significantly larger center-of-mass mediolateral and vertical fluctuations, respectively. Participants rated the ZeroG as the most stable, but more participants complained it caused excessive pressure and pain. Crutches were rated with the highest perceived exertion and lowest comfort, whereas no significant differences between ZeroG and iWalk were found for these parameters. Significant differences among the devices were identified across all measurements, aligning with previous studies for crutches and iWalk. ZeroG demonstrated favorable performance in most aspects, highlighting the potential of AFOs in enhancing gait rehabilitation when unloading is necessary. However, poor comfort and atypical sound-side ankle kinematics were evident with ZeroG. These findings can assist clinicians in making educated decisions about prescribing ankle-foot unloading devices and guide the design of improved devices that overcome the limitations of existing solutions.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Foot and ankle unloading is essential in various clinical contexts, including ulcers, tendon ruptures, and fractures. Choosing the right assistive device is crucial for functionality and recovery. Yet, research on the impact of devices beyond crutches, particularly ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) designed to unload the ankle and foot, is limited. This study investigates the effects of three types of devices-forearm crutches, knee crutch, and AFO-on biomechanical, metabolic, and subjective parameters during walking with unilateral ankle-foot unloading.
METHODS
METHODS
Twenty healthy participants walked at a self-selected speed in four conditions: unassisted able-bodied gait, and using three unloading devices, namely forearm crutches, iWalk knee crutch, and ZeroG AFO. Comprehensive measurements, including motion capture, force plates, and metabolic system, were used to assess various spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, and metabolic parameters. Additionally, participants provided subjective feedback through questionnaires. The conditions were compared using a within-subject crossover study design with repeated measures ANOVA.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Significant differences were found between the three devices and able-bodied gait. Among the devices, ZeroG exhibited significantly faster walking speed and lower metabolic cost. For the weight-bearing leg, ZeroG exhibited the shortest stance phase, lowest braking forces, and hip and knee angles most similar to normal gait. However, ankle plantarflexion after push-off using ZeroG was most different from normal gait. IWalk and crutches caused significantly larger center-of-mass mediolateral and vertical fluctuations, respectively. Participants rated the ZeroG as the most stable, but more participants complained it caused excessive pressure and pain. Crutches were rated with the highest perceived exertion and lowest comfort, whereas no significant differences between ZeroG and iWalk were found for these parameters.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Significant differences among the devices were identified across all measurements, aligning with previous studies for crutches and iWalk. ZeroG demonstrated favorable performance in most aspects, highlighting the potential of AFOs in enhancing gait rehabilitation when unloading is necessary. However, poor comfort and atypical sound-side ankle kinematics were evident with ZeroG. These findings can assist clinicians in making educated decisions about prescribing ankle-foot unloading devices and guide the design of improved devices that overcome the limitations of existing solutions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38689255
doi: 10.1186/s12984-024-01333-w
pii: 10.1186/s12984-024-01333-w
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Comparative Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
67Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Swart E, Bezhani H, Greisberg J, Vosseller JT. How long should patients be kept non-weight bearing after ankle fracture fixation? A survey of OTA and AOFAS members. Injury. 2015;46:1127–30.
doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2015.03.029
pubmed: 25816708
Christensen TM, et al. Duration of off-loading and recurrence rate in charcot osteo-arthropathy treated with less restrictive regimen with removable walker. J Diabetes Complications. 2012;26:430–4.
doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2012.05.006
pubmed: 22699112
Elraiyah T, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of off-loading methods for diabetic foot ulcers. J Vasc Surg Manag Diabet Foot. 2016;63: 59S–68S.e2.
Bus SA, et al. Guidelines on offloading foot ulcers in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update). Diabetes/Metab Res Rev. 2020:36.
Rasouli F, Reed KB. Walking assistance using crutches: a state of the art review. J Biomech. 2020;98.
doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2019.109489
pubmed: 31831139
Haubert LL, et al. A comparison of shoulder joint forces during ambulation with crutches versus a walker in persons with incomplete spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:63–70.
doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.07.311
pubmed: 16401440
Lee JU, et al. Analysis of plantar foot pressure during the non-crutch, two-point, and four-point crutch gait performed by healthy volunteers. J Phys Ther Sci. 2011;23:489–93.
doi: 10.1589/jpts.23.489
Li S, Armstrong CW, Cipriani D. Three-point gait crutch walking: variability in ground reaction force during weight bearing. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82:86–92.
doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.16347
pubmed: 11239291
Mcbeath AA, Bahrke M, Balke B. Efficiency of assisted ambulation determined by oxygen consumption measurement. JBJS. 1974;56:994-1000.
Sankarankutty M, Stallard J, Rose GK. The relative efficiency of ‘swing through’ gait on axillary, elbow and Canadian crutches compared to normal walking. J Biomed Eng. 1979;1:55–7.
doi: 10.1016/0141-5425(79)90011-6
pubmed: 537334
Requejo PS, et al. Upper extremity kinetics during Lofstrand crutch-assisted gait. Med Eng Physics. 2005;27:19–29.
Goh JC, Bose K, Toh SL. Biomechanical study on axillary crutches during single-leg swing-through gait. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1986;10:89–95.
doi: 10.3109/03093648609164506
pubmed: 3774516
Stallard J, Sankarankutty M, Rose GK. Lower-limb vertical groundreaction forces during crutch walking. J Med Eng Technol. 1978;2:201–2.
doi: 10.3109/03091907809161796
Stievano S, Roesch F, Prommersberger K-J, Fuhrmann R, Mühldorfer-Fodor M. Load analysis of hands and feet while using different types of crutches with various leg’s weight bearing. J Orthopaed Res. 2023;jor.25595.
Yoshiko A, et al. Effects of post-fracture non-weight-bearing immobilization on muscle atrophy, intramuscular and intermuscular adipose tissues in the thigh and calf. Skelet Radiol. 2018;47:1541–1549.
Saltzstein RJ, Hardin S, Hastings J. Osteoporosis in spinal cord injury: using an index of mobility and its relationship to bone density. J Am Paraplegia Soc. 1992;15:232–4.
doi: 10.1080/01952307.1992.11761524
pubmed: 1431871
Campbell EL, et al. Skeletal muscle adaptations to physical inactivity and subsequent retraining in young men. Biogerontology. 2013;14:247–59.
doi: 10.1007/s10522-013-9427-6
pubmed: 23666342
Kazakia GJ, et al. The influence of disuse on bone microstructure and mechanics assessed by HR-pQCT. Bone. 2014;63:132–40.
doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2014.02.014
pubmed: 24603002
pmcid: 4041600
Stallard J, Dounis E, Major RE, Rose GK. One leg swing through gait using two crutches: an analysis of the ground reaction forces and gait phases. Acta Orthop Scand. 1980;51:71–7.
doi: 10.3109/17453678008990771
pubmed: 7376848
Fischer J, et al. Forearm pressure distribution during ambulation with elbow crutches: a cross-sectional study. J NeuroEng Rehabil. 2014;11:1–9.
doi: 10.1186/1743-0003-11-61
Ginanneschi F, Filippou G, Milani P, Biasella A, Rossi A. Ulnar nerve compression neuropathy at Guyon’s canal caused by crutch walking: case report with ultrasonographic nerve imaging. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90:522–4.
doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.09.568
pubmed: 19254622
Venkatanarasimha N, Kamath S, Kambouroglou G, Ostlere SJ. Proximal ulna stress fracture and stress reaction of the proximal radius associated with the use of crutches: a case report and literature review. J Orthop Traumatol. 2009;10:155–157.
Martin KD, Unangst AM, Huh J, Chisholm J. Patient preference and physical demand for hands-free single crutch vs standard axillary crutches in foot and ankle patients. Foot Ankle Int. 2019;40:1203–8.
doi: 10.1177/1071100719862743
pubmed: 31375043
Kim J, Kim Y, Moon J, Kong J, Kim SJ. Biomechanical analysis of the unaffected limb while using a hands-free crutch. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2023;8:56.
doi: 10.3390/jfmk8020056
pubmed: 37218852
pmcid: 10204483
Certified Orthopedics I. The ZeroG Brace - Ankle Foot Orthosis (AFO) 2023.
Tyson SF, Kent RM. Effects of an ankle-foot orthosis on balance and walking after stroke: a systematic review and pooled meta-analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:1377–85.
doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.12.025
pubmed: 23416220
Waterval NFJ, Brehm M-A, Harlaar J, Nollet F. Individual stiffness optimization of dorsal leaf spring ankle-foot orthoses in people with calf muscle weakness is superior to standard bodyweight-based recommendations. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2021;18:97.
doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00890-8
pubmed: 34103064
pmcid: 8186056
Totah D, Menon M, Jones-Hershinow C, Barton K, Gates DH. The impact of ankle-foot orthosis stiffness on gait: a systematic literature review. Gait Posture. 2019;69:101–11.
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.01.020
pubmed: 30708092
Russell Esposito E, Schmidtbauer KA, Wilken JM. Experimental comparisons of passive and powered ankle-foot orthoses in individuals with limb reconstruction. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018;15:111.
doi: 10.1186/s12984-018-0455-y
pubmed: 30463576
pmcid: 6249722
Alimerzaloo F, Kashani RV, Saeedi H, Farzi M, Fallahian N. Patellar tendon bearing brace: combined effect of heel clearance and ankle status on foot plantar pressure. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2014;38:34–8.
doi: 10.1177/0309364613486916
pubmed: 23690286
Shaw JE, et al. The mechanism of plantar unloading in total contact casts: implications for design and clinical use. Foot Ankle Int. 1997;18:809–17.
doi: 10.1177/107110079701801210
pubmed: 9429884
Malatesta D, et al. Energy cost of walking and gait instability in healthy 65- and 80-yr-olds. J Appl Physiol. 2003;95:2248–56.
doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.01106.2002
pubmed: 12882986
Hochberg Y. Some generalizations of the T-method in simultaneous inference. J Multivar Anal. 1974;4:224–34.
doi: 10.1016/0047-259X(74)90015-3
Hackney KJ, Bradley AP, Roehl AS, McGrath R, Smith J. Energy expenditure and substrate utilization with hands-free crutches compared to conventional lower-extremity injury mobility devices. Foot Ankle Orthop. 2022;7:247301142211398.
doi: 10.1177/24730114221139800
Yao D, et al. Functional, spiroergometric, and subjective comparisons between forearm crutches and hands-free single crutches in a crossover study. Foot Ankle Orthop. 2023;8:247301142311727.
doi: 10.1177/24730114231172734
Kirtley C, Whittle M, Jefferson R. Influence of walking speed on gait parameters. J Biomed Eng. 1985;7:282–288.
Fukuchi CA, Fukuchi RK, Duarte M. Effects of walking speed on gait biomechanics in healthy participants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2019;8:153.
doi: 10.1186/s13643-019-1063-z
pubmed: 31248456
pmcid: 6595586
Arnold EM, Hamner SR, Seth A, Millard M, Delp SL. How muscle fiber lengths and velocities affect muscle force generation as humans walk and run at different speeds. J Exp Biol. 2013;216:2150–60.
pubmed: 23470656
pmcid: 3656509
Saunders JB, Inman VT, Eberhart HD. The major determinants in normal and pathological gait. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 1953;35:543–58.
doi: 10.2106/00004623-195335030-00003
Thys H, Willems PA, Saels P. Energy cost, mechanical work and muscular efficiency in swing-through gait with elbow crutches. J Biomech. 1996;29:1473–82.
doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(96)84543-X
pubmed: 8894928
Ortega JD, Farley CT. Minimizing center of mass vertical movement increases metabolic cost in walking. J Appl Physiol. 2005;99:2099-2107.
Bertrand K, Raymond MH, Miller WC, Martin Ginis KA, Demers L. Walking aids for enabling activity and participation: a systematic review. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;96:894.
doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000836
pubmed: 29176406
Baldock M, et al. Adjustable prosthetic sockets: a systematic review of industrial and research design characteristics and their justifications. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2023;20:147.
doi: 10.1186/s12984-023-01270-0
pubmed: 37926807
pmcid: 10626671
Tanaka H, Nagata K, Goto T, Hoshiko H, Inoue A, The effect of the patellar tendon-bearing cast on loading. J Bone Jt Surg Br Vol. 2000;82-B:228–232.
Racaru S, Bolton Saghdaoui L, Roy Choudhury J, Wells M, Davies AH. Offloading treatment in people with diabetic foot disease: a systematic scoping review on adherence to foot offloading. Diabetes Metab Syndr Clin Res Rev. 2022;16:102493.
doi: 10.1016/j.dsx.2022.102493