yes / Background
Unilateral trans-tibial amputees have bilaterally reduced toe clearance, and an increased risk of foot contact, while crossing obstacles compared to the able-bodied. While the able-bodied tend to lead with a ‘preferred’ limb it is equivocal whether amputees prefer to lead with the intact or prosthetic limb. This study determined the effects of laterality, compared to side of amputation, on amputees' obstacle crossing performance. To help understand why laterality could affect performance we also assessed knee proprioception for both limbs.
Methods
Foot placement and toe clearance parameters were recorded while nine amputees crossed obstacles of varying heights leading with both their intact and prosthetic limbs. Joint-position sense was also assessed. Participants self-reported which limb was their preferred (dominant) limb.
Findings
There were no significant differences in foot placements or toe clearance variability across lead-limb conditions. There were no significant differences in toe clearance between intact and prosthetic lead-limbs (p = 0.28) but toe clearance was significantly higher when amputees led with their preferred compared to non-preferred limb (p = 0.025). There was no difference in joint-position sense between the intact and residual knees (p = 0.34) but joint-position sense tended to be more accurate for the preferred, compared to non-preferred limb (p = 0.08).
Interpretation
Findings suggest that, despite the mechanical constraints imposed by use of a prosthesis, laterality may be as important in lower-limb amputees as it is in the able bodied. This suggests that amputees should be encouraged to cross obstacles leading with their preferred limb. / Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BRADFORD/oai:bradscholars.brad.ac.uk:10454/8224 |
| Date | 02 March 2015 |
| Creators | De Asha, Alan R., Buckley, John |
| Source Sets | Bradford Scholars |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Article, published version paper |
| Rights | © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds