ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2026
The effect of microprocessor-controlled prostheses on walking pattern and energy consumption in above-the-knee amputees.
Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate microprocessor-controlled (MIC) and non-microprocessor-controlled (non-MIC) prostheses in above-the-knee amputees in terms of energy consumption and gait pattern. Patients and methods: Between June 2018 and February 2019, a total of 34 unilateral transfemoral male amputee patients (mean age: 40.6±13.2 years; range, 19 to 65 years) were included in this cross-sectional study. The patients were divided into two groups as Group 1 (n=17) using an MIC knee unit prosthesis and Group 2 (n=17) using a mechanical (n=5), pneumatic (n=8), or hydraulically (n=4) controlled knee unit prosthesis. Outcome measurements included three-dimensional gait analysis, Locomotor Capabilities Index-5 (LCI-5), exercise tolerance test, Satisfaction with Prosthesis Questionnaire (SAT-PRO), Short Form-36 (SF-36) Health Survey Questionnaire, and 6-min walk test (6MWT). Results: In the MIC prosthesis group, amputated side walking speed (p=0.007), intact side walking speed (p=0.020), amputated side stride length (p=0.008), and amputated side single support phase duration (p=0.049) were significantly higher, while amputated side stride time (p=0.029) was significantly lower compared to the non-MIC prosthesis group. Energy consumption value was significantly lower in the MIC prosthesis group (p=0.005). The MIC prostheses were found to provide a significant improvement in physical health component compared to non-MIC prostheses (p<0.05). Satisfaction with the current prosthesis was significantly higher in the MIC prosthesis group (p=0.002). The gait capacity was found to be significantly higher in the MIC prosthesis group (p<0.001). Conclusion: Our study results suggest that MIC prostheses should be used more widely in the rehabilitation process and daily lives of above-the-knee 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.