ArticleScientific reports2022
Influence of insole material density in the stability of patients with prosthetic unilateral transtibial amputation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Postural control and trunk muscle activation in transtibial amputees: A pilot electromyographic study.PloS one · 2025Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
People with lower limb amputation present greater displacements of their centre of gravity in a static situation than able-bodied individuals, as they depend on visual information to a greater extent, which implies an altered stability pattern. The efficacy of different hardness of plantar support to help maintain stability has not yet been determined. The aim of the present study is to assess stability in people with unilateral transtibial amputation with prosthesis in a static situation with insoles of different degrees of hardness and visual conditions with respect to the able-bodied population. For this purpose, 25 patients with amputation and 25 able-bodied individuals were included in both groups, postural stability was assessed by stabilometry. This assessment was carried out under normal conditions (on the floor of the dynamometric platform with eyes open), and under altered conditions (with the interposition of different materials such as plantar support: rigid and soft insoles and, eyes shut). Three variables were considered to assess stability: length of movement of the barycenter (mm), lateral velocity (mm/sg) and anterior velocity (mm/sg). All of them were analysed with the patient in static on the dynamometric platform. The results showed statistically significant differences between the two groups, (amputees and controls) with less stability in the amputee group (p < 0.05) when analysing the variables of length of movement of the barycenter, lateral velocity and anterior velocity. Amputee patients with open eyes exhibited greater stability than those with closed eyes. The hard insoles improved the stability data in amputees (length of movement of the barycenter and anterior velocity) with respect to the barefoot condition, and the soft insoles showed less stability than the patients with hard insoles, or than the barefoot patients. From the results obtained in this study, we can conclude that the PP-DWST 4 mm rigid insoles improve static stability in people with amputation. However, soft insoles impair stability and are therefore discouraged.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.