Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38192637›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2023

Distal weight bearing in transtibial prosthesis users wearing pin suspension.

Adam J Krout, Mathew J Weissinger, Joseph C Mertens, Katheryn J Allyn, Brian G Larsen, Nicholas K McCarthy, Joseph L Garbini, Joan E Sanders

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 45% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adam J KroutSanders Prosthetic and Orthotic Science & Technology Laboratory, Bioengineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Mathew J WeissingerSanders Prosthetic and Orthotic Science & Technology Laboratory, Bioengineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Joseph C MertensSanders Prosthetic and Orthotic Science & Technology Laboratory, Bioengineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Katheryn J AllynSanders Prosthetic and Orthotic Science & Technology Laboratory, Bioengineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Brian G LarsenSanders Prosthetic and Orthotic Science & Technology Laboratory, Bioengineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Nicholas K McCarthySanders Prosthetic and Orthotic Science & Technology Laboratory, Bioengineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Joseph L GarbiniMechanical Engineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
Joan E SandersSanders Prosthetic and Orthotic Science & Technology Laboratory, Bioengineering Department, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States.
University of Washington · US

Funding

Measuring In-Socket Residual Limb Volume FluctuationR01HD060585 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI SANDERS, JOAN E. · 2009 to 2024
$6.6M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD060585
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Low-level distal weight bearing in transtibial prosthesis users may help maintain perfusion and improve both proprioception and residual limb tissue health. Methods: The primary objectives of this research were to develop a sensor to continuously measure distal weight bearing, evaluate how prosthesis design variables affected weight bearing levels, and assess fluctuations in distal weight bearing during at-home and community use. Results: In-lab testing on a small group of participants wearing adjustable sockets demonstrated that if distal contact was present, when socket size was increased distal weight bearing increased and when socket size was reduced distal weight bearing decreased. During take-home use, participants accepted the distal weight bearing level set by the research team. It ranged between 1.1% and 6.4% BW for all days tested. The coefficient of variation (standard deviation/mean) ranged from 25% to 43% and was expected due in part to differences in walking style, speed, terrain, direction of ambulation, and bout duration. Two participants commented that they preferred presence of distal weight bearing to non-presence. Discussion: Next steps in this research are to develop clinical practices to determine target distal weight bearing levels and ranges, and to simplify the design of the sensor and weight bearing adjustment mechanism for clinical use.

Indexed as

distal weight bearingend bearinglimb-socket interfacepin suspensionprostheticsresidual limbsocket fittranstibial amputee

Identifiers

PMID38192637
PMCPMC10773776
OpenAlexW4390055899

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.