Characterisation of the responsive properties of two running-specific prosthetic models

Lara Grobler,Suzanne Ferreira,Benedicte Vanwanseele,Elmarie E Terblanche
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364616660249
2017-04-01
Prosthetics and Orthotics International
Abstract:BACKGROUND: The need for information regarding running-specific prosthetic properties has previously been voiced. Such information is necessary to assist in athletes' prostheses selection.OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the characteristics of two commercially available running-specific prostheses.STUDY DESIGN: The running-specific prostheses were tested (in an experimental setup) without the external interference of athlete performance variations.METHODS: Four stiffness categories of each running-specific prosthetic model (Xtend<sup>™</sup> and Xtreme<sup>™</sup>) were tested at seven alignment setups and three drop masses (28, 38 and 48 kg). Results for peak ground reaction force (GRF<sub>peak</sub>), contact time ( t<sub>c</sub>), flight time ( t<sub>f</sub>), reactive strength index (RSI) and maximal compression (Δ L) were determined during controlled dropping of running-specific prostheses onto a force platform with different masses attached to the experimental setup.RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were found between the different setups of the running-specific prostheses. Statistically significant differences were found between the two models for all outcome variables (GRF<sub>peak</sub>, Xtend &gt; Xtreme; t<sub>c</sub>, Xtreme &gt; Xtend; t<sub>f</sub>, Xtreme &gt; Xtend; RSI, Xtend &gt; Xtreme; Δ L, Xtreme &gt; Xtend; p &lt; 0.05).CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that the Xtreme stores more elastic energy than the Xtend, leading to a greater performance response. The specific responsive features of blades could guide sprint athletes in their choice of running-specific prostheses. Clinical relevance Insights into the running-specific prosthesis (RSP) properties and an understanding of its responsive characteristics have implications for athletes' prosthetic choice. Physiologically and metabolically, a short sprint event (i.e. 100 m) places different demands on the athlete than a long sprint event (i.e. 400 m), and the RSP should match these performance demands.
rehabilitation,orthopedics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?