Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25557982›Full record

ReviewJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2015

Control strategies for active lower extremity prosthetics and orthotics: a review.

Michael R Tucker, Jeremy Olivier, Anna Pagel, Hannes Bleuler, Mohamed Bouri, Olivier Lambercy, José Del R Millán, Robert Riener, Heike Vallery, Roger Gassert

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 194 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
194citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
46.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

194 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 1,044 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A review of user needs to drive the development of lower limb prostheses.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. EMG-driven control in lower limb prostheses: a topic-based systematic review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Locomotion Decoding (Applied bionics and biomechanics · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

134 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael R TuckerRehabilitation Engineering Lab, Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland. mtucker@ethz.ch.
Jeremy Olivier
Anna Pagel
Hannes Bleuler
Mohamed Bouri
Olivier Lambercy
José Del R Millán
Robert Riener
Heike Vallery
Roger Gassert
ETH Zurich · CHÉcole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne · CHUniversity of Zurich · CHWyss Center for Bio and Neuroengineering · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

: Technological advancements have led to the development of numerous wearable robotic devices for the physical assistance and restoration of human locomotion. While many challenges remain with respect to the mechanical design of such devices, it is at least equally challenging and important to develop strategies to control them in concert with the intentions of the user.This work reviews the state-of-the-art techniques for controlling portable active lower limb prosthetic and orthotic (P/O) devices in the context of locomotive activities of daily living (ADL), and considers how these can be interfaced with the user's sensory-motor control system. This review underscores the practical challenges and opportunities associated with P/O control, which can be used to accelerate future developments in this field. Furthermore, this work provides a classification scheme for the comparison of the various control strategies.As a novel contribution, a general framework for the control of portable gait-assistance devices is proposed. This framework accounts for the physical and informatic interactions between the controller, the user, the environment, and the mechanical device itself. Such a treatment of P/Os--not as independent devices, but as actors within an ecosystem--is suggested to be necessary to structure the next generation of intelligent and multifunctional controllers.Each element of the proposed framework is discussed with respect to the role that it plays in the assistance of locomotion, along with how its states can be sensed as inputs to the controller. The reviewed controllers are shown to fit within different levels of a hierarchical scheme, which loosely resembles the structure and functionality of the nominal human central nervous system (CNS). Active and passive safety mechanisms are considered to be central aspects underlying all of P/O design and control, and are shown to be critical for regulatory approval of such devices for real-world use.The works discussed herein provide evidence that, while we are getting ever closer, significant challenges still exist for the development of controllers for portable powered P/O devices that can seamlessly integrate with the user's neuromusculoskeletal system and are practical for use in locomotive ADL.

Indexed as

Lower ExtremityOrthotic DevicesProstheses and ImplantsActivities of Daily LivingElectromyographyGaitHumansLocomotionProsthesis Design

Identifiers

PMID25557982
PMCPMC4326520
OpenAlexW2142114107

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.