Author ORCID Identifier

Stergiou - https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9737-9939

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

5-2017

Abstract

Objective

To determine changes in average daily step count (ADSC) and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) due to use of low-activity feet (LA) and high-activity energy-storage-and-return (ESAR) feet, and examine the sensitivity of these measures to properly classify different prosthetic feet.

Design

Individuals with transtibial amputations (n = 28) participated in a 6-week, randomized crossover study. During separate 3-week periods, participants wore either a LA foot (eg, solid-ankle-cushioned-heel) or an ESAR foot. Differences in 6MWT and ADSC at the end of the 3-week period were recorded.

Results

Subjects performed similarly in the 6MWT with the LA and ESAR foot (P = 0.871) and ADSC (P = 0.076). The correct classification of ESAR is only 51.9% and 61.5% with 6MWT and ADSC, respectively. For the LA foot, correct classification is less than 50% for both tests.

Conclusions

Neither ADSC or 6MWT are responsive to changes in prosthetic feet. The pitfalls and shortcomings of these instruments with regard to their ability to detect differences in prosthetic feet are outlined. Based on these results, it is not recommended that the 6MWT and ADSC are used as a means to assess outcomes for different prosthetic feet.

Comments

This is a non-final version of an article published in final form in American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation: May 2017 - Volume 96 - Issue 5 - p 294-300

doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000607

Journal Title

American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation

Volume

96

Issue

5

First Page

294

Last Page

300

Included in

Biomechanics Commons

Share

COinS