JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

Bioenergetic comparison of a new energy-storing foot and SACH foot in traumatic below-knee vascular amputations

J M Casillas, V Dulieu, M Cohen, I Marcer, J P Didier
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 1995, 76 (1): 39-44
7811172
In this study, the metabolic performances of a new energy-storing foot (Proteor) and of the solid-ankle cushion heel (SACH) are compared. Twelve patients with traumatic below-knee amputations (mean age: 50.0 +/- 19.9 years) and 12 patients with vascular below-knee amputations (mean age: 73 +/- 7 years) were studied. Oxygen uptake (VO2) was measured in all the subjects on a walkway at a self-selected velocity; only the subjects with traumatic amputation were tested on a level treadmill (progressive speed: 2.4-4 and 6 km/h), and then in two randomized trials: incline (+5%) and decline walking treadmill test at 4 km/h. Vascular explorations were done in the vascular patients: distal pressure measurements, pulse plethysmography, transcutaneous oxygen tension. Free walking was improved in subjects with traumatic amputation using the energy-storing foot (+6%), with a better bioenergetic efficiency (0.24 +/- 0.4mL/kg.m vs 0.22 +/- 0.04mL/kg.m). However, in subjects with vascular amputation, this foot did not produce an increased free velocity nor an improved energy cost. During the level treadmill test, the traumatic amputee subjects showed a decrease of energy expenditure with the new prosthetic foot, more significant at sufficient speed (4 km/h): 17.00 +/- 3.42 vs 14.67 +/- 2.05 mL/kg/min (p < .05). The same effect is shown during the incline (19.31 +/- 2.80 vs 16.79 +/- 2.32 mL/kg/min-p < .02) and decline walking tests (14.13 +/- 3.64 vs 11.81 +/- 1.54mL/kg/min-p < .02). There is no significant difference in cardiocirculatory effects between the two types of prosthetic foot. Despite a lower velocity, the subjects with vascular amputation exceed 70% of the maximal heart rate, with the cardiocirculatory factor being the main cause of walking restriction. The energy-storing foot should be reserved for active and fast walkers, whereas the SACH foot seems more suitable for elderly patients with amputation with a slow walk.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
7811172
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"