Maximum velocity and leg-specific ground reaction force production change with radius during flat curve sprinting.

Humans attain slower maximum velocity (vmax) on curves versus straight paths, potentially due to centripetal ground reaction force (GRF) production, and this depends on curve radius. Previous studies found GRF production differences between an athlete's inside versus outside leg relative to the center of the curve. Further, sprinting clockwise (CW) versus counterclockwise (CCW) slows vmax. We determined vmax, step kinematics and individual leg GRF on a straight path and on curves with 17.2 and 36.5 m radii for nine (8 male, 1 female) competitive sprinters running CW and CCW and compared vmax with three predictive models. We combined CW and CCW directions and found that vmax slowed by 10.0±2.4% and 4.1±1.6% (P<0.001) for the 17.2 and 36.5 m radius curves versus the straight path, respectively. vmax values from the predictive models were up to 3.5% faster than the experimental data. Contact length was 0.02 m shorter and stance average resultant GRF was 0.10 body weights (BW) greater for the 36.5 versus 17.2 m radius curves (P<0.001). Stance average centripetal GRF was 0.10 BW greater for the inside versus outside leg (P<0.001) on the 36.5 m radius curve. Stance average vertical GRF was 0.21 BW (P<0.001) and 0.10 BW (P=0.001) lower for the inside versus outside leg for the 17.2 and 36.5 m radius curves, respectively. For a given curve radius, vmax was 1.6% faster in the CCW compared with CW direction (P=0.003). Overall, we found that sprinters change contact length and modulate GRFs produced by their inside and outside legs as curve radius decreases, potentially limiting vmax.

Evaluating the 'cost of generating force' hypothesis across frequency in human running and hopping.

The volume of active muscle and duration of extensor muscle force well explain the associated metabolic energy expenditure across body mass and velocity during level-ground running and hopping. However, if these parameters fundamentally drive metabolic energy expenditure, then they should pertain to multiple modes of locomotion and provide a simple framework for relating biomechanics to metabolic energy expenditure in bouncing gaits. Therefore, we evaluated the ability of the 'cost of generating force' hypothesis to link biomechanics and metabolic energy expenditure during human running and hopping across step frequencies. We asked participants to run and hop at 85%, 92%, 100%, 108% and 115% of preferred running step frequency. We calculated changes in active muscle volume, duration of force production and metabolic energy expenditure. Overall, as step frequency increased, active muscle volume decreased as a result of postural changes via effective mechanical advantage (EMA) or duty factor. Accounting for changes in EMA and muscle volume better related to metabolic energy expenditure during running and hopping at different step frequencies than assuming a constant EMA and muscle volume. Thus, to ultimately develop muscle mechanics models that can explain metabolic energy expenditure across different modes of locomotion, we suggest more precise measures of muscle force production that include the effects of EMA.

Differences in postural sway among healthy adults are associated with the ability to perform steady contractions with leg muscles.

Upright standing involves small displacements of the center of mass about the base of support. These displacements are often quantified by measuring various kinematic features of the center-of-pressure trajectory. The plantar flexors have often been identified as the key muscles for the control of these displacements; however, studies have suggested that the hip abductor and adductors may also be important. The purpose of our study was to determine the association between the force capabilities of selected leg muscles and sway-area rate across four balance conditions in young (25 ± 4 years; 12/19 women) and older adults (71 ± 5 years; 5/19 women). Due to the marked overlap in sway-area rate between the two age groups, the data were collapsed, and individuals were assigned to groups of low- and high-sway area rates based on a k-medoid cluster analysis. The number of participants assigned to each group varied across balance conditions and a subset of older adults was always included in the low-sway group for each balance condition. The most consistent explanatory variable for the variance in sway-area rate was force control of the hip abductors and ankle dorsiflexors as indicated by the magnitude of the normalized force fluctuations (force steadiness) during a submaximal isometric contraction. The explanatory power of the regression models varied across conditions, thereby identifying specific balance conditions that should be examined further in future studies of postural control.

Added lower limb mass does not affect biomechanical asymmetry but increases metabolic power in runners with a unilateral transtibial amputation.

PURPOSE: we determined the metabolic and biomechanical effects of adding mass to the running-specific prosthesis (RSP) and biological foot of individuals with a unilateral transtibial amputation (TTA) during running. METHODS: 10 individuals (8 males, 2 females) with a TTA ran on a force-measuring treadmill at 2.5 m/s with 100 g and 300 g added to their RSP alone or to their RSP and biological foot while we measured their metabolic rates and calculated peak vertical ground reaction force (vGRF), stance-average vGRF, and step time symmetry indices. RESULTS: for every 100 g added to the RSP alone, metabolic power increased by 0.86% (p = 0.007) and for every 100 g added to the RSP and biological foot, metabolic power increased by 1.74% ([Formula: see text] 0.001) during running. Adding mass had no effect on peak vGRF (p = 0.102), stance-average vGRF (p = 0.675), or step time (p = 0.413) symmetry indices. We also found that the swing time of the affected leg was shorter than the unaffected leg across conditions ([Formula: see text] 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: adding mass to the lower limbs of runners with a TTA increased metabolic power by more than what has been reported for those without an amputation. We found no effect of added mass on biomechanical asymmetry, but the affected leg had consistently shorter swing times than the unaffected leg. This suggests that individuals with a TTA maintain asymmetries despite changes in RSP mass and that lightweight prostheses could improve performance by minimizing metabolic power without affecting asymmetry.

Passive-elastic knee-ankle exoskeleton reduces the metabolic cost of walking.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that passive-elastic exoskeletons with springs in parallel with the ankle can reduce the metabolic cost of walking. We developed and tested the use of an unpowered passive-elastic exoskeleton for walking that stores elastic energy in a spring from knee extension at the end of the leg swing phase, and then releases this energy to assist ankle plantarflexion at the end of the stance phase prior to toe-off. The exoskeleton uses a system of ratchets and pawls to store and return elastic energy through compression and release of metal springs that act in parallel with the knee and ankle, respectively. We hypothesized that, due to the assistance provided by the exoskeleton, net metabolic power would be reduced compared to walking without using an exoskeleton. METHODS: We compared the net metabolic power required to walk when the exoskeleton only acts at the knee to resist extension at the end of the leg swing phase, to that required to walk when the stored elastic energy from knee extension is released to assist ankle plantarflexion at the end of the stance phase prior to toe-off. Eight (4 M, 4F) subjects walked at 1.25 m/s on a force-measuring treadmill with and without using the exoskeleton while we measured their metabolic rates, ground reaction forces, and center of pressure. RESULTS: We found that when subjects used the exoskeleton with energy stored from knee extension and released for ankle plantarflexion, average net metabolic power was 11% lower than when subjects walked while wearing the exoskeleton with the springs disengaged (p = 0.007), but was 23% higher compared to walking without the exoskeleton (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The use of a novel passive-elastic exoskeleton that stores and returns energy in parallel with the knee and ankle, respectively, has the potential to improve the metabolic cost of walking. Future studies are needed to optimize the design and elucidate the underlying biomechanical and physiological effects of using an exoskeleton that acts in parallel with the knee and ankle. Moreover, addressing and improving the exoskeletal design by reducing and closely aligning the mass of the exoskeleton could further improve the metabolic cost of walking.

Athletes With Versus Without Leg Amputations: Different Biomechanics, Similar Running Economy.

Athletes with transtibial amputations use carbon-fiber prostheses to run. Compared with biological legs, these devices differ in structure and function, and consequently yield affected leg running biomechanics that are theoretically more economical than those of nonamputees. However, experimental data indicate that athletes with unilateral and bilateral transtibial amputations exhibit running economy values that are well within the range of nonamputee values.

What determines the metabolic cost of human running across a wide range of velocities?

The 'cost of generating force' hypothesis proposes that the metabolic rate during running is determined by the rate of muscle force development (1/tc, where tc=contact time) and the volume of active leg muscle. A previous study assumed a constant recruited muscle volume and reported that the rate of force development alone explained ∼70% of the increase in metabolic rate for human runners across a moderate velocity range (2-4 m s-1). We hypothesized that over a wider range of velocities, the effective mechanical advantage (EMA) of the lower limb joints would overall decrease, necessitating a greater volume of active muscle recruitment. Ten high-caliber male human runners ran on a force-measuring treadmill at 8, 10, 12, 14, 16 and 18 km h-1 while we analyzed their expired air to determine metabolic rates. We measured ground reaction forces and joint kinematics to calculate contact time and estimate active muscle volume. From 8 to 18 km h-1, metabolic rate increased 131% from 9.28 to 21.44 W kg-1tc decreased from 0.280 s to 0.190 s, and thus the rate of force development (1/tc) increased by 48%. Ankle EMA decreased by 19.7±11%, knee EMA increased by 11.1±26.9% and hip EMA decreased by 60.8±11.8%. Estimated active muscle volume per leg increased 52.8% from 1663±152 cm3 to 2550±169 cm3 Overall, 98% of the increase in metabolic rate across the velocity range was explained by just two factors: the rate of generating force and the volume of active leg muscle.

Step time asymmetry increases metabolic energy expenditure during running.

To improve locomotor performance, coaches and clinicians encourage individuals with unilateral physical impairments to minimize biomechanical asymmetries. Yet, it is unknown if biomechanical asymmetries per se, affect metabolic energy expenditure in individuals with or without unilateral impairments during running. Thus, inter-leg biomechanical asymmetries may or may not influence distance-running performance. PURPOSE: We sought to determine whether running with asymmetric step times affects metabolic rate in unimpaired individuals. METHODS: Ten unimpaired individuals were instructed to run on a force-measuring treadmill at 2.8 m/s and contact the ground simultaneously to the beat of an audible metronome. The metronome either played at time intervals equal to the respective participant's preferred step times (0% asymmetry), or at time intervals that elicited asymmetric step times between legs (7, 14, and 21% step time asymmetry); stride time remained constant across all trials. We measured ground reaction forces and metabolic rates during each trial. RESULTS: Every 10% increase in step time and stance average vertical ground reaction force asymmetry increased net metabolic power by 3.5%. Every 10% increase in ground contact time asymmetry increased net metabolic power by 7.8%. More asymmetric peak braking and peak propulsive ground reaction forces, leg stiffness, as well as positive and negative external mechanical work, but not peak vertical ground reaction force, increased net metabolic power during running. Step time asymmetry increases the net metabolic power of unimpaired individuals during running. Therefore, unimpaired individuals likely optimize distance-running performance by using symmetric step times and overall symmetric biomechanics.

The Functional Roles of Muscles, Passive Prostheses, and Powered Prostheses During Sloped Walking in People With a Transtibial Amputation.

Sloped walking is challenging for individuals with transtibial amputation (TTA) due to the functional loss of the ankle plantarflexors. Prostheses that actively generate ankle power may help to restore this lost function. The purpose of this study was to use musculoskeletal modeling and simulation to quantify the mechanical power delivered to body segments by passive and powered prostheses and the remaining muscles in the amputated and intact legs during sloped walking. We generated walking simulations from experimental kinematic and kinetic data on slopes of 0, ±3 deg and ±6 deg in eight people with a TTA using powered and passive prostheses and eight nonamputees. Consistent with our hypothesis, the amputated leg hamstrings generated more power to both legs on uphill slopes in comparison with nonamputees, which may have implications for fatigue or overuse injuries. The amputated leg knee extensors delivered less power to the trunk on downhill slopes (effect size (ES) ≥ 1.35, p ≤ 0.02), which may be due to muscle weakness or socket instability. The power delivered to the trunk from the powered and passive prostheses was not significantly different (p > 0.05), However, using the powered prosthesis on uphill slopes reduced the contributions from the amputated leg hamstrings in all segments (ES ≥ 0.46, p ≤ 0.003), suggesting that added ankle power reduces the need for the hamstrings to compensate for lost ankle muscle function. Neither prosthesis replaced gastrocnemius function to absorb power from the trunk and deliver it to the leg on all slopes.

Maximum-speed curve-running biomechanics of sprinters with and without unilateral leg amputations.

On curves, non-amputees' maximum running speed is slower on smaller radii and thought to be limited by the inside leg's mechanics. Similar speed decreases would be expected for non-amputees in both counterclockwise and clockwise directions because they have symmetric legs. However, sprinters with unilateral leg amputation have asymmetric legs, which may differentially affect curve-running performance and Paralympic competitions. To investigate this and understand the biomechanical basis of curve running, we compared maximum curve-running (radius 17.2 m) performance and stride kinematics of six non-amputee sprinters and 11 sprinters with a transtibial amputation. Subjects performed randomized, counterbalanced trials: two straight, two counterclockwise curves and two clockwise curves. Non-amputees and sprinters with an amputation all ran slower on curves compared with straight running, but with different kinematics. Non-amputees ran 1.9% slower clockwise compared with counterclockwise (P<0.05). Sprinters with an amputation ran 3.9% slower with their affected leg on the inside compared with the outside of the curve (P<0.05). Non-amputees reduced stride length and frequency in both curve directions compared with straight running. Sprinters with an amputation also reduced stride length in both curve-running directions, but reduced stride frequency only on curves with the affected leg on the inside. During curve running, non-amputees and athletes with an amputation had longer contact times with their inside compared with their outside leg, suggesting that the inside leg limits performance. For sprinters with an amputation, the prolonged contact times of the affected versus unaffected leg seem to limit maximum running speed during both straight running and running on curves with the affected leg on the inside.

Does use of a powered ankle-foot prosthesis restore whole-body angular momentum during walking at different speeds?

BACKGROUND: Whole-body angular momentum (H) influences fall risk, is tightly regulated during walking, and is primarily controlled by muscle force generation. People with transtibial amputations using passive-elastic prostheses typically have greater H compared with nonamputees. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) Do people with unilateral transtibial amputations using passive-elastic prostheses have greater sagittal and frontal plane H ranges of motion during walking compared with nonamputees and compared with using powered prostheses? (2) Does use of powered ankle-foot prostheses result in equivalent H ranges in all planes of motion compared with nonamputees during walking as a result of normative prosthetic ankle power generation? METHODS: Eight patients with a unilateral transtibial amputation and eight nonamputees walked 0.75, 1.00, 1.25, 1.50, and 1.75 m/s while we measured kinematics and ground reaction forces. We calculated H for participants using their passive-elastic prosthesis and a powered ankle-foot prosthesis and for nonamputees at each speed. RESULTS: Patients using passive-elastic prostheses had 32% to 59% greater sagittal H ranges during the affected leg stance phase compared with nonamputees at 1.00 to 1.75 m/s (p < 0.05). Patients using passive-elastic prostheses had 5% and 9% greater sagittal H ranges compared with using powered prostheses at 1.25 and 1.50 m/s, respectively (p < 0.05). Participants using passive-elastic prostheses had 29% and 17% greater frontal H ranges at 0.75 and 1.50 m/s, respectively, compared with nonamputees (p < 0.05). Surprisingly, patients using powered prostheses had 26% to 50% greater sagittal H ranges during the affected leg stance phase compared with nonamputees at 1.00 to 1.75 m/s (p < 0.05). Patients using powered prostheses also had 26% greater frontal H range compared with nonamputees at 0.75 m/s (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: People with a transtibial amputation may more effectively regulate H at two specific walking speeds when using powered compared with passive-elastic prostheses. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Our results support the hypothesis that an ankle-foot prosthesis capable of providing net positive work during the stance phase of walking reduces sagittal plane H; future studies are needed to validate our biomechanical findings with larger numbers of patients and should determine whether powered prostheses can decrease the risk of falls in patients with a transtibial amputation.

Optimal starting block configuration in sprint running; a comparison of biological and prosthetic legs.

In the 2012 Paralympic 100 m and 200 m finals, 86% of athletes with a unilateral amputation placed their unaffected leg on the front starting block. Can this preference be explained biomechanically? We measured the biomechanical effects of starting block configuration for seven nonamputee sprinters and nine athletes with a unilateral amputation. Each subject performed six starts, alternating between their usual and unusual starting block configurations. When sprinters with an amputation placed their unaffected leg on the front block, they developed 6% greater mean resultant combined force compared with the opposite configuration (1.38 ± 0.06 vs 1.30 ± 0.11 BW, P = .015). However, because of a more vertical push angle, horizontal acceleration performance was equivalent between starting block configurations. We then used force data from each sprinter with an amputation to calculate the hypothetical starting mechanics for a virtual nonamputee (two unaffected legs) and a virtual bilateral amputee (two affected legs). Accelerations of virtual bilateral amputees were 15% slower compared with athletes with a unilateral amputation, which in turn were 11% slower than virtual nonamputees. Our biomechanical data do not explain the starting block configuration preference but they do explain the starting performance differences observed between nonamputee athletes and those with leg amputations.

The spring stiffness profile within a passive, full-leg exoskeleton affects lower-limb joint mechanics while hopping.

Passive, full-leg exoskeletons that act in parallel with the legs can reduce the metabolic power of bouncing gaits like hopping. However, the magnitude of metabolic power reduction depends on the spring stiffness profile of the exoskeleton and is presumably affected by how users adapt their lower-limb joint mechanics. We determined the effects of using a passive, full-leg exoskeleton with degressive (DG), linear (LN) and progressive (PG) stiffness springs on lower-limb joint kinematics and kinetics during stationary, bilateral hopping at 2.4 Hz. We found that the use of a passive, full-leg exoskeleton primarily reduced the muscle-tendon units (MTUs) contribution to overall joint moment and power at the ankle, followed by the knee, due to the average exoskeleton moment arm around each joint. The greatest reductions occurred with DG springs, followed by LN and PG stiffness springs, probably due to differences in elastic energy return. Moreover, the relative distribution of positive joint power remained unchanged when using a passive, full-leg exoskeleton compared with unassisted hopping. Passive, full-leg exoskeletons simultaneously assist multiple lower-limb joints and future assistive devices should consider the effects of spring stiffness profile in their design.

Effects of prosthetic stiffness and added mass on metabolic power and asymmetry in female runners with a leg amputation.

Similar to nonamputees, female athletes with unilateral transtibial amputation (TTA) using running-specific leg prostheses (RSPs) may have worse running economy and higher rates of running-related injury than male athletes. Optimizing RSP configuration for female athletes could improve running economy and minimize biomechanical asymmetry, which has been associated with running-related injury. Nine females with a TTA ran at 2.5 m/s while we measured metabolic rates and ground reaction forces. Subjects used an RSP with a manufacturer-recommended stiffness category, one category less stiff and two categories less stiff than recommended. Use of an RSP two categories less stiff resulted in 3.0% lower net metabolic power (P = 0.04), 7.8% lower affected leg stiffness (P = 6.01 × 10-4), increased contact time asymmetry (P = 0.04), and decreased stance average vertical ground reaction force asymmetry (P = 0.04) compared with a recommended stiffness category RSP. Lower RSP stiffness (kN/m) values were associated with lower net metabolic power (P = 0.02), lower affected leg stiffness (P = 1.36 × 10-4), longer affected leg contact time (P = 1.46 × 10-4), and similar affected leg peak and stance-average vertical ground reaction force compared with higher RSP stiffness values. Subjects then used the RSP stiffness category that elicited the lowest net metabolic power with 100 g, 200 g, and 300 g added distally. We found no significant effects of added mass on net metabolic power, biomechanics, or asymmetry. These results suggest that female runners with a TTA could decrease metabolic power during running while minimizing biomechanical asymmetries, which have been associated with running-related injury, by using an RSP two categories less stiff than manufacturer recommended.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Females with unilateral transtibial amputation can improve running performance through reductions in net metabolic power by using a running-specific prosthesis (RSP) that is less stiff than manufacturer-recommended. Lower RSP stiffness values are associated with greater leg stiffness and contact time asymmetry, and lower stance-average vertical ground reaction force asymmetry. However, we found that adding mass to the RSP did not affect net metabolic power and stance-phase biomechanical asymmetries during running.

The Effect of Unequal Crank Arm Lengths and Cycling-Specific Prostheses for Recreational Riders with a Transtibial Amputation.

PURPOSE: We determined the effects of shorter affected side crank arm lengths and cycling with two different prostheses on joint and crank power, asymmetry, and net efficiency. METHODS: 12 participants with a TTA rode at 1.5 W·kg -1 with equal (175 mm) and shorter affected side crank arms (160, 165, 170 mm) using a daily-use prosthesis and CSP. We used statistical parametric mapping to determine differences in instantaneous joint and crank power between prostheses, and linear mixed-effects models to compare average joint and crank power, asymmetry, and net efficiency. RESULTS: Shorter affected side crank arm lengths reduced the magnitude of peak positive (p ≤ 0.001) and negative (p < 0.001) crank power on the affected side. Use of a CSP increased the magnitude of peak positive knee power (p < 0.001) and decreased the magnitude of peak negative crank power (p < 0.001) on the affected side compared to a daily-use prosthesis. Shorter affected side crank arm lengths while using a CSP reduced average hip joint (p = 0.014) and hip transfer (p = 0.025) power asymmetry from 35% to 20% and 118% to 62%, respectively. However, we found no significant differences in affected side average joint or crank power, knee joint or crank power asymmetry, or net efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Cycling at 1.5 W·kg -1 with unequal crank arm lengths and CSPs improves hip joint power and hip transfer power asymmetry but does not alter crank asymmetry or net efficiency for recreational cyclists with a TTA.

Greater than recommended stiffness and power setting of a stance-phase powered leg prosthesis can improve step-to-step transition work and effective foot length ratio during walking in people with transtibial amputation.

People with unilateral transtibial amputation (TTA) using a passive-elastic prosthesis exhibit lower positive affected leg trailing work (ALtrail Wpos) and a greater magnitude of negative unaffected leg leading work (ULlead Wneg) during walking than non-amputees, which may increase joint pain and osteoarthritis risk in the unaffected leg. People with TTA using a stance-phase powered prosthesis (e.g., BiOM, Ottobock, Duderstadt, Germany) walk with increased ALtrail Wpos and potentially decreased magnitude of ULlead Wneg compared to a passive-elastic prosthesis. The BiOM includes a passive-elastic prosthesis with a manufacturer-recommended stiffness category and can be tuned to different power settings, which may change ALtrail Wpos, ULlead Wneg, and the prosthesis effective foot length ratio (EFLR). Thirteen people with TTA walked using 16 different prosthetic stiffness category and power settings on a level treadmill at 0.75-1.75 m/s. We constructed linear mixed effects models to determine the effects of stiffness category and power settings on ALtrail Wpos, ULlead Wneg, and EFLR and hypothesized that decreased stiffness and increased power would increase ALtrail Wpos, not change and decrease ULlead Wneg magnitude, and decrease and not change prosthesis EFLR, respectively. We found there was no significant effect of stiffness category on ALtrail Wpos but increased stiffness reduced ULlead Wneg magnitude, perhaps due to a 0.02 increase in prosthesis EFLR compared to the least stiff category. Furthermore, we found that use of the BiOM with 10% and 20% greater than recommended power increased ALtrail Wpos and decreased ULlead Wneg magnitude at 0.75-1.00 m/s. However, prosthetic power setting depended on walking speed so that use of the BiOM increased ULlead Wneg magnitude at 1.50-1.75 m/s compared to a passive-elastic prosthesis. Ultimately, our results suggest that at 0.75-1.00 m/s, prosthetists should utilize the BiOM attached to a passive-elastic prosthesis with an increased stiffness category and power settings up to 20% greater than recommended based on biological ankle values. This prosthetic configuration can allow people with unilateral transtibial amputation to increase ALtrail Wpos and minimize ULlead Wneg magnitude, which could reduce joint pain and osteoarthritis risk in the unaffected leg and potentially lower the metabolic cost of walking.

Low-profile prosthetic foot stiffness category and size, and shoes affect axial and torsional stiffness and hysteresis.

Introduction: Passive-elastic prosthetic feet are manufactured with numerical stiffness categories and prescribed based on the user's body mass and activity level, but mechanical properties, such as stiffness values and hysteresis are not typically reported. Since the mechanical properties of passive-elastic prosthetic feet and footwear can affect walking biomechanics of people with transtibial or transfemoral amputation, characterizing these properties can provide objective metrics for comparison and aid prosthetic foot prescription and design. Methods: We characterized axial and torsional stiffness values, and hysteresis of 33 categories and sizes of a commercially available passive-elastic prosthetic foot model [Össur low-profile (LP) Vari-flex] with and without a shoe. We assumed a greater numerical stiffness category would result in greater axial and torsional stiffness values but would not affect hysteresis. We hypothesized that a greater prosthetic foot length would not affect axial stiffness values or hysteresis but would result in greater torsional stiffness values. We also hypothesized that including a shoe would result in decreased axial and torsional stiffness values and greater hysteresis. Results: Prosthetic stiffness was better described by curvilinear than linear equations such that stiffness values increased with greater loads. In general, a greater numerical stiffness category resulted in increased heel, midfoot, and forefoot axial stiffness values, increased plantarflexion and dorsiflexion torsional stiffness values, and decreased heel, midfoot, and forefoot hysteresis. Moreover, for a given category, a longer prosthetic foot size resulted in decreased heel, midfoot, and forefoot axial stiffness values, increased plantarflexion and dorsiflexion torsional stiffness values, and decreased heel and midfoot hysteresis. In addition, adding a shoe to the prosthetic foot resulted in decreased heel and midfoot axial stiffness values, decreased plantarflexion torsional stiffness values, and increased heel, midfoot, and forefoot hysteresis. Discussion: Our results suggest that manufacturers should adjust the design of each category to ensure the mechanical properties are consistent across different sizes and highlight the need for prosthetists and researchers to consider the effects of shoes in combination with prostheses. Our results can be used to objectively compare the LP Vari-flex prosthetic foot to other prosthetic feet to inform their prescription, design, and use for people with a transtibial or transfemoral amputation.

The contribution of lower-limb joint quasi-stiffness to theoretical leg stiffness during level, uphill and downhill running at different speeds.

Humans change joint quasi-stiffness (k joint) and leg stiffness (kleg) when running at different speeds on level ground and during uphill and downhill running. These mechanical properties can inform device designs for running such as footwear, exoskeletons and prostheses. We measured kinetics and kinematics from 17 runners (10 M; 7 F) at three speeds on 0°, ±2°, ±4° and ±6° slopes. We calculated ankle and knee k joint, the quotient of change in joint moment and angular displacement, and theoretical leg stiffness (klegT) based on the joint external moment arms and k joint. Runners increased k ankle at faster speeds (p < 0.01). Runners increased and decreased the ankle and knee contributions to klegT, respectively, by 2.89% per 1° steeper uphill slope (p < 0.01) during the first half of stance. Runners decreased and increased ankle and knee joint contributions to klegT, respectively, by 3.68% during the first half and 0.86% during the second half of stance per 1° steeper downhill slope (p < 0.01). Thus, biomimetic devices require stiffer k ankle for faster speeds, and greater ankle contributions and greater knee contributions to klegT during the first half of stance for steeper uphill and downhill slopes, respectively.

Dynamic stability of running: the effects of speed and leg amputations on the maximal Lyapunov exponent.

In this paper, we study dynamic stability during running, focusing on the effects of speed, and the use of a leg prosthesis. We compute and compare the maximal Lyapunov exponents of kinematic time-series data from subjects with and without unilateral transtibial amputations running at a wide range of speeds. We find that the dynamics of the affected leg with the running-specific prosthesis are less stable than the dynamics of the unaffected leg and also less stable than the biological legs of the non-amputee runners. Surprisingly, we find that the center-of-mass dynamics of runners with two intact biological legs are slightly less stable than those of runners with amputations. Our results suggest that while leg asymmetries may be associated with instability, runners may compensate for this effect by increased control of their center-of-mass dynamics.

Effects of a powered ankle-foot prosthesis on kinetic loading of the unaffected leg during level-ground walking.

BACKGROUND: People with a lower-extremity amputation that use conventional passive-elastic ankle-foot prostheses encounter a series of stress-related challenges during walking such as greater forces on their unaffected leg, and may thus be predisposed to secondary musculoskeletal injuries such as chronic joint disorders. Specifically, people with a unilateral transtibial amputation have an increased susceptibility to knee osteoarthritis, especially in their unaffected leg. Previous studies have hypothesized that the development of this disorder is linked to the abnormally high peak knee external adduction moments encountered during walking. An ankle-foot prosthesis that supplies biomimetic power could potentially mitigate the forces and knee adduction moments applied to the unaffected leg of a person with a transtibial amputation, which could, in turn, reduce the risk of knee osteoarthritis. We hypothesized that compared to using a passive-elastic prosthesis, people with a transtibial amputation using a powered ankle-foot prosthesis would have lower peak resultant ground reaction forces, peak external knee adduction moments, and corresponding loading rates applied to their unaffected leg during walking over a wide range of speeds. METHODS: We analyzed ground reaction forces and knee joint kinetics of the unaffected leg of seven participants with a unilateral transtibial amputation and seven age-, height- and weight-matched non-amputees during level-ground walking at 0.75, 1.00, 1.25, 1.50, and 1.75 m/s. Subjects with an amputation walked while using their own passive-elastic prosthesis and a powered ankle-foot prosthesis capable of providing net positive mechanical work and powered ankle plantar flexion during late stance. RESULTS: Use of the powered prosthesis significantly decreased unaffected leg peak resultant forces by 2-11% at 0.75-1.50 m/s, and first peak knee external adduction moments by 21 and 12% at 1.50 and 1.75 m/s, respectively. Loading rates were not significantly different between prosthetic feet. CONCLUSIONS: Use of a biomimetic powered ankle-foot prosthesis decreased peak resultant force at slow and moderate speeds and knee external adduction moment at moderate and fast speeds on the unaffected leg of people with a transtibial amputation during level-ground walking. Thus, use of an ankle-foot prosthesis that provides net positive mechanical work could reduce the risk of comorbidities such as knee osteoarthritis.