Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38274781›Full record

ArticleIEEE open journal of engineering in medicine and biology2023

3D Motion Analysis for the Assessment of Dynamic Coupling in Transtibial Prosthetics: A Proof of Concept.

Sean Cullen, Ruth Mackay, Amir Mohagheghi, Xinli Du

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in IEEE open journal of engineering in medicine and biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Sean CullenDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, College of Engineering, Design and Physical SciencesBrunel University London UB8 3PH Uxbridge U.K.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9515-9000
Ruth MackayDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, College of Engineering, Design and Physical SciencesBrunel University London UB8 3PH Uxbridge U.K.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6456-6914
Amir MohagheghiDivision of Sport, Health & Exercise Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Life SciencesBrunel University London UB8 3PH Uxbridge U.K.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4295-3718
Xinli DuDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, College of Engineering, Design and Physical SciencesBrunel University London UB8 3PH Uxbridge U.K.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2604-0804

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessment of coupling between transtibial sockets and users is historically based on clinicians' observations and experience, but can be inaccurate and unreliable. Therefore, we present a proof of concept, for five out of six possible degrees of freedom coupling metric system for a socket, using motion analysis calibrated on a 3D printed limb substitute. The method is compatible with any socket suspension method and does not require prior modifications to the socket. Calibration trials were used to locate the axis of rotation of the knee joint referenced against a marker cluster on the thigh; this allowed for the identification of the limb during test trials despite the entire residuum being obscured from view by the socket. The error in the technique was found to be within 0.7 mm in displacement and 0.7 degrees in rotation, based on the control data. Dynamic testing showed the Inter Quartile Range (IQR) of inter time step variance was <0.5 mm/deg for all metrics. The method can form a basis for objective socket evaluation, improve clinical practice and the quality of life for amputees.

Indexed as

Dynamic couplingmotion analysispistoningquantitative methodstranstibial prosthetics

Identifiers

PMID38274781
PMCPMC10810304

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.