Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38689255›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024

Walking with unilateral ankle-foot unloading: a comparative biomechanical analysis of three assistive devices.

Eshraq Saffuri, Eyal Izak, Yinon Tal, Einat Kodesh, Yoram Epstein, Dana Solav

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2024. 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
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Impact of sole designs of offloading AFO on gait dynamics: a predictive neuromechanical simulation study.Proceedings of the ... IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics. IEEE/RAS-EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics · 2024
    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

6 authors.

Eshraq Saffuri *Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.
Eyal Izak *School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Yinon TalFaculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.
Einat KodeshDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.
Yoram EpsteinSchool of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.
Dana SolavFaculty of Mechanical Engineering, Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel. danas@technion.ac.il.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFoot and ankle unloading is essential in various clinical contexts, including ulcers, tendon ruptures, and fractures. Choosing the right assistive device is crucial for functionality and recovery. Yet, research on the impact of devices beyond crutches, particularly ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) designed to unload the ankle and foot, is limited. This study investigates the effects of three types of devices-forearm crutches, knee crutch, and AFO-on biomechanical, metabolic, and subjective parameters during walking with unilateral ankle-foot unloading.

methodsTwenty healthy participants walked at a self-selected speed in four conditions: unassisted able-bodied gait, and using three unloading devices, namely forearm crutches, iWalk knee crutch, and ZeroG AFO. Comprehensive measurements, including motion capture, force plates, and metabolic system, were used to assess various spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic, and metabolic parameters. Additionally, participants provided subjective feedback through questionnaires. The conditions were compared using a within-subject crossover study design with repeated measures ANOVA.

resultsSignificant differences were found between the three devices and able-bodied gait. Among the devices, ZeroG exhibited significantly faster walking speed and lower metabolic cost. For the weight-bearing leg, ZeroG exhibited the shortest stance phase, lowest braking forces, and hip and knee angles most similar to normal gait. However, ankle plantarflexion after push-off using ZeroG was most different from normal gait. IWalk and crutches caused significantly larger center-of-mass mediolateral and vertical fluctuations, respectively. Participants rated the ZeroG as the most stable, but more participants complained it caused excessive pressure and pain. Crutches were rated with the highest perceived exertion and lowest comfort, whereas no significant differences between ZeroG and iWalk were found for these parameters.

conclusionsSignificant differences among the devices were identified across all measurements, aligning with previous studies for crutches and iWalk. ZeroG demonstrated favorable performance in most aspects, highlighting the potential of AFOs in enhancing gait rehabilitation when unloading is necessary. However, poor comfort and atypical sound-side ankle kinematics were evident with ZeroG. These findings can assist clinicians in making educated decisions about prescribing ankle-foot unloading devices and guide the design of improved devices that overcome the limitations of existing solutions.

Indexed as

AnkleFootWalkingAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaCross-Over StudiesCrutchesFemaleFoot OrthosesGaitHumansMaleSelf-Help DevicesYoung AdultAnkle-foot orthosis (AFO)CrutchesGait analysisGait rehabilitationHands-free crutchJoint kinematicsknee crutchMetabolic costNon-weight-bearing

Identifiers

PMID38689255
PMCPMC11059772

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.