ArticleFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2024
Mechanical loading of bone-anchored implants during functional performance tests in service members with transfemoral limb loss.
Article in Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring Student Experiences in a Transdisciplinary Clinical Immersion Course on Needs Identification in Veteran and Service Member Healthcare Settings.Biomedical engineering education · 2026Article
- Evidence-based recommendation of a powered knee for transfemoral bone-anchored prostheses: A cross-sectional study.Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: For individuals with limb loss, bone-anchored implants create a direct structural and functional connection to a terminal prosthesis. Here, we characterized the mechanical loads distal to the abutment during several functional performance tests in Service members with transfemoral (TF) limb loss, to expand on prior work evaluating more steady-state ambulation on level ground or slopes/stairs. Methods: Two males with unilateral TF limb loss and two males with bilateral TF limb loss participated after two-stage osseointegration (24 and 12 months, respectively). Tri-directional forces and moments were wirelessly recorded through a sensor, fit distal to the abutment, during six functional tests: Timed Up and Go (TUG), Four Square Step Test (FSST), Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT), Edgren Side-Step Test (SST), T-Test (TTEST), and Illinois Agility Test (IAT). Additionally, participants performed a straight-line gait evaluation on a 15 m level walkway at a self-selected speed (0.93-1.24 m/s). Peak values for each component of force and moment were extracted from all six functional tests; percent differences compared each peak with respect to the corresponding mean peak in straight-line walking. Results: Peak mechanical loads were largest during non-steady state components of the functional tests (e.g., side-stepping during SST or TTEST, standing up from the ground during IAT). Relative to walking, peak forces during functional tests were larger by up to 143% (anterior-posterior), 181% (medial-lateral), and 110% (axial); peak moments were larger by up to 108% (flexion-extension), 50% (ab/adduction), and 211% (internal/external rotation). Conclusions: A more comprehensive understanding of the mechanical loads applied to bone-anchored implants during a variety of activities is critical to maximize implant survivability and long-term outcomes, particularly for Service members who are generally young at time of injury and return to active lifestyles.
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.