ArticleScientific reports2025
Comparative study by FEM of different liners of a transfemoral amputated lower limb.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
- Intra-osseous and coverage fixation for inferior pole fracture of the patella: a comparative finite element analysis and retrospective cohort study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Biomechanical evaluation of a lower-limb implant model under gait and stumbling conditions using finite element analysis.Scientific reports · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The mechanical behavior of prosthetic liners significantly influences stress distribution, soft tissue protection, and the overall efficiency of the prosthetic. While extensive research has been conducted on liner materials, the impact of liner thickness (2 mm, 4 mm, and 6 mm) on biomechanical response remains underexplored. This study utilizes finite element analysis in Abaqus to investigate how liner material (Gel vs. Silicone) and thickness affect contact pressure (CPRESS), maximum principal strain (Le. Max), shear stress (CSHEAR1), and vertical displacement (U3) at the residual limb-liner interface. A three-dimensional numerical model was developed to simulate stress transmission and displacement behavior under physiological loading conditions. The results demonstrate that liner thickness plays a critical role in modulating pressure distribution and mechanical stability, with Gel providing superior flexibility and shock absorption, whereas Silicone offers enhanced structural integrity. At a thickness of 2 mm, the highest pressure of 0.4656 MPa is recorded. When the thickness is increased to 4 mm, the pressure decreases to 0.4153 MPa, reflecting a reduction of approximately 10.8%. Further increasing the thickness to 6 mm results in a pressure drop of 0.3825 MPa, corresponding to a total reduction of 17.9%. These findings provide quantitative insights into stress attenuation mechanisms, contributing to the optimization of prosthetic liner design for improved clinical outcomes in lower-limb amputees.
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.