Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29623025›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2018

Impact of Powered Knee-Ankle Prosthesis on Low Back Muscle Mechanics in Transfemoral Amputees: A Case Series.

Chandrasekaran Jayaraman, Shenan Hoppe-Ludwig, Susan Deems-Dluhy, Matt McGuire, Chaithanya Mummidisetty, Rachel Siegal, Aileen Naef, Brian E Lawson, Michael Goldfarb, Keith E Gordon and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Effects of a Powered Knee-Ankle Prosthesis on Intact Joint Biomechanics Across Sustained Activities of Daily Life: A Case Series.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Implementation and Validation of a Data-Driven Variable Impedance Controller on the Össur Power Knee.IEEE ... International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics : [proceedings] · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Nonholonomic Virtual Constraints for Control of Powered Prostheses Across Walking Speeds.IEEE transactions on control systems technology : a publication of the IEEE Control Systems Society · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

11 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Chandrasekaran JayaramanMax Nader Lab for Rehabilitation Technologies & Outcomes Research, Center for Bionic Medicine, Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, IL, United States.
Shenan Hoppe-LudwigMax Nader Lab for Rehabilitation Technologies & Outcomes Research, Center for Bionic Medicine, Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, IL, United States.
Susan Deems-DluhyMax Nader Lab for Rehabilitation Technologies & Outcomes Research, Center for Bionic Medicine, Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, IL, United States.
Matt McGuireMax Nader Lab for Rehabilitation Technologies & Outcomes Research, Center for Bionic Medicine, Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, IL, United States.
Chaithanya MummidisettyMax Nader Lab for Rehabilitation Technologies & Outcomes Research, Center for Bionic Medicine, Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, IL, United States.
Rachel SiegalMax Nader Lab for Rehabilitation Technologies & Outcomes Research, Center for Bionic Medicine, Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, IL, United States.
Aileen NaefMax Nader Lab for Rehabilitation Technologies & Outcomes Research, Center for Bionic Medicine, Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, IL, United States.
Brian E LawsonDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, United States.
Michael GoldfarbDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, United States.
Keith E GordonDepartment of Physical Therapy and Human Movement Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, United States.
Arun JayaramanMax Nader Lab for Rehabilitation Technologies & Outcomes Research, Center for Bionic Medicine, Shirley Ryan Ability Lab, Chicago, IL, United States.
Shirley Ryan AbilityLab · USVanderbilt University · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Regular use of prostheses is critical for individuals with lower limb amputations to achieve everyday mobility, maintain physical and physiological health, and achieve a better quality of life. Use of prostheses is influenced by numerous factors, with prosthetic design playing a critical role in facilitating mobility for an amputee. Thus, prostheses design can either promote biomechanically efficient or inefficient gait behavior. In addition to increased energy expenditure, inefficient gait behavior can expose prosthetic user to an increased risk of secondary musculoskeletal injuries and may eventually lead to rejection of the prosthesis. Consequently, researchers have utilized the technological advancements in various fields to improve prosthetic devices and customize them for user specific needs. One evolving technology is powered prosthetic components. Presently, an active area in lower limb prosthetic research is the design of novel controllers and components in order to enable the users of such powered devices to be able to reproduce gait biomechanics that are similar in behavior to a healthy limb. In this case series, we studied the impact of using a powered knee-ankle prostheses (PKA) on two transfemoral amputees who currently use advanced microprocessor controlled knee prostheses (MPK). We utilized outcomes pertaining to kinematics, kinetics, metabolics, and functional activities of daily living to compare the efficacy between the MPK and PKA devices. Our results suggests that the PKA allows the participants to walk with gait kinematics similar to normal gait patterns observed in a healthy limb. Additionally, it was observed that use of the PKA reduced the level of asymmetry in terms of mechanical loading and muscle activation, specifically in the low back spinae regions and lower extremity muscles. Further, the PKA allowed the participants to achieve a greater range of cadence than their predicate MPK, thus allowing them to safely ambulate in variable environments and dynamically control speed changes. Based on the results of this case series, it appears that there is considerable potential for powered prosthetic components to provide safe and efficient gait for individuals with above the knee amputation.

Indexed as

amputeesgaitlow back painmicroprocessor kneemusculoskeletal injuriespowered knee-ankle prosthesisvariability

Identifiers

PMID29623025
PMCPMC5874899
OpenAlexW2793986549

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.