ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2026
Above-Knee Amputees' Balance and Recovery Strategies After Mediolateral Perturbations from a Cable-Driven System.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study aims to analyze the balance responses and foot placement strategies of above-knee amputees following controlled mediolateral perturbations and to compare these responses with those of non-amputee individuals.
methodsWe recruited eight above-knee amputees and eight non-amputee participants to walk on an instrumented treadmill while a cable-driven system delivered mediolateral perturbations to the waist. We applied perturbations at three gait timings (heel strike, late swing, and late single support), two directions (prosthesis and sound side, left and right for non-amputees), and two force magnitudes (7.5 and 15% of body weight), for a total of twelve conditions. We applied each condition once per trial and recorded five trials. We randomized the order and timing of perturbations within each trial and recorded full-body motion capture to quantify balance and recovery behavior.
resultsAbove-knee amputees fell 16 times when pulled toward their sound side and 29 times when pulled toward their prosthesis side, whereas non-amputee participants never fell. Instability increased for both groups with higher perturbation magnitudes and later gait timings. Amputees showed significantly greater instability than non-amputees during late single support and high-force pulls. Their recovery strategies also diverged during late single support, varying by pull direction. The recovery time and number of steps required to regain balance depended on both direction and magnitude.
conclusionAbove-knee amputees demonstrated distinct recovery strategies and greater instability than non-amputee participants. These findings highlight the need for advancements in assistive technology to improve balance and reduce fall risk for above-knee amputees.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42684597What 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.