Biomechanical responses of young adults with unilateral transfemoral amputation using two types of mechanical stance control prosthetic knee joints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prosthetic knee joint function is important in the rehabilitation of individuals with transfemoral amputation. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to assess the gait patterns associated with two types of mechanical stance control prosthetic knee joints-weight-activated braking knee and automatic stance-phase lock knee. It was hypothesized that biomechanical differences exist between the two knee types, including a prolonged swing-phase duration and exaggerated pelvic movements for the weight-activated braking knee during gait. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective crossover study. METHODS: Spatiotemporal, kinematic, and kinetic parameters were obtained via instrumented gait analysis for 10 young adults with a unilateral transfemoral amputation. Discrete gait parameters were extracted based on their magnitudes and timing. RESULTS: A 1.01% ± 1.14% longer swing-phase was found for the weight-activated braking knee (p < 0.05). The prosthetic ankle push-off also occurred earlier in the gait cycle for the weight-activated braking knee. Anterior pelvic tilt was 3.3 ± 3.0 degrees greater for the weight-activated braking knee. This range of motion was also higher (p < 0.05) and associated with greater hip flexion angles. CONCLUSIONS: Stance control affects biomechanics primarily in the early and late stance associated with prosthetic limb loading and unloading. The prolonged swing-phase time for the weight-activated braking knee may be associated with the need for knee unloading to initiate knee flexion during gait. The differences in pelvic tilt may be related to knee stability and possibly the different knee joint stance control mechanisms. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Understanding the influence of knee function on gait biomechanics is important in selecting and improving treatments and outcomes for individuals with lower-limb amputations. Weight-activated knee joints may result in undesired gait deviations associated with stability in early stance-phase, and swing-phase initiation in the late stance-phase of gait.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".