medigraphic.com
Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán

2014, Number S1

<< Back

Rev Invest Clin 2014; 66 (S1)

Device to assess in-socket pressure distribution for partial foot amputation

Álvarez-Camacho M, Urrusti JL, Acero MC, Duque-Gastelum CG, Rodríguez-Reyes G, Mendoza-Cruz F

Language: Spanish
References: 43
Page: 131-141
PDF size: 417.69 Kb.


ABSTRACT

A device for dynamic acquisition and distribution analysis of in-socket pressure for patients with partial foot amputation is presented in this work. By using the developed system, we measured and generated pressure distribution graphs, obtained maximal pressure, and calculated pressure-time integral (PTI) of three subjects with partial foot amputation and of a group of Healthy subjects (Hs) (n = 10). Average maximal pressure in the healthy group was 19.4 ± 4.11 PSI, while for the three amputated patients, this was 27.8 ± 1.38, 17.6 ± 1.15, 29.10 ± 3.9 PSI, respectively. Maximal pressure-time integral for healthy subjects was 11.56 ± 2.83 PSI*s, and for study subjects was 19.54 ± 1.9, 12.35 ± 1.48, and 13.17 ± 1.31 PSI*s, respectively. The results of the control group agree with those previously reported in the literature. The pressure distribution pattern showed clear differences between study subjects and those of the control group; these graphs allowed us to identify the pressure in regions-of-interest that could be critical, such as surgical scars. The system presented in this work will aid to assess the effectiveness with which prosthetic systems distribute load, given that the formation of ulcers is highly linked to the pressure exercised at the point of contact; in addition, these results will help to investigate the comfort perception of the prosthesis, a factor directly influenced by the stump’s pressure distribution.


REFERENCES

  1. International Diabetes Federation. Position Statement, The diabetic foot. 2005. Disponible en: http://www idf.org/Position_ statementsdiabetic_foot [Acceso 2013].

  2. Pound N, Chipchase S, Treece K, Game F, Jeffcoate W. Ulcerfree survival following management of foot ulcers in diabetes. Diabet Med 2005; 22(10): 1306-9.

  3. Bowker JH. Amputations and disarticulations within the foot: surgical management. En: Smith DG, Michael JW, Bowker JH (eds.). Atlas of Amputations and Limb Deficiencies: Surgical, Prosthetic, and Rehabilitation Principles. 3a. ed. Rosemont: AAOS; 2004, p. 249.

  4. Andersen CA, Roukis TS. The diabetic foot. Surg Clin North AM 2007; 87(5): 1149-77.

  5. Sage RA. Biomechanics of ambulation after partial foot amputation: prevention and management of reulceration. JPO 2007; 19(3): 77-9.

  6. Toursarkissian B, Hagino RT, Khan K, Schoolfield J, Shireman PK, Harkless L. Healing of transmetatarsal amputation in the diabetic patient: is angiography predictive? Ann Vasc Surg 2005; 19(6): 769-73.

  7. Dillon MP, Fatone S, Hodge MC. Biomechanics of ambulation after partial foot amputation: a systematic literature review. JPO 2007; 19 (3S): 2-61. Álvarez-Camacho M, et al. Presión en prótesis para amputación parcial de pie. Rev Invest Clin 2014; 66 (Supl. 1): s131-s141 s141

  8. Dillon MP, Barker TM. Comparison of gait of persons with partial foot amputation wearing prosthesis to matched control group: observational study. J Rehabil Res Dev 2008; 45(9): 1317-34.

  9. Dillon MP, Fatone S, Hansen AH. Effect of prosthetic design on center of pressure excursion in partial foot prostheses. J Rehabil Res Dev 2011; 48(2): 161-78.

  10. Spaulding SE, Chen T, Chou LS. Selection of an above or below- ankle orthosis for individuals with neuropathic partial foot amputation: a pilot study. Prosthet Orthot Int 2012; 36(2): 217-24.

  11. Lavery LA, Lavery DC, Quebedeax-Farnham TL. Increased foot pressures after great toe amputation in diabetes. Diabetes Care 1995; 18(11): 1460-2.

  12. Mueller MJ, Strube MJ, Allen BT. Therapeutic footwear can reduce plantar pressures in patients with diabetes and transmetatarsal amputation. Diabetes Care 1997; 20(4): 637-41.

  13. Lobmann R, Kayser R, Kasten G, Kasten U, Kluge K, Neumann W, Lehnert H. Effects of preventative footwear on foot pressure as determined by pedobarography in diabetic patients: a prospective study. Diabet Med 2001; 18(4): 314-9.

  14. Perttunen, J. Foot loading in normal and pathological walking. Tesis. Jyvakyla (Finlandia): University of Jyaskyla; 2002.

  15. Actis RL, Ventura LB, Lott DJ, Smith KE, Commean PK, Hastings MK, Mueller MJ. Multi-plug insole design to reduce peak plantar pressure on the diabetic foot during walking. Med Biol Eng Comput 2008; 46(4): 363-71.

  16. Saito M, Nakajima K, Takano C, Ohta Y, Sugimoto C, Ezoe R, et al. An in-shoe device to measure plantar pressure during daily human activity. Med Eng Phys 2011; 33(5): 638-45.

  17. Wooldringe J, Culleton JL. Preventing diabetic foot disease: lessons from the Medicare therapeutic shoe demonstration. Am J Public Health 1996; 86(7): 935-8.

  18. Singh N, Armstrong DG, Lipsky BA. Preventing foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. JAMA 2005; 293(2): 217-28.

  19. Owings TM, Apelqvist J, Stenström A, Becker M, Bus SA, Kalpen A, Ulbrecht JS, Cavanagh PR. Plantar pressures in diabetic patients with foot ulcers which have remained healed. Diabet Med 2009; 26(11): 1141-6.

  20. Yavuz M, Tajaddini A, Botek G, Davis BL. Temporal characteristics of plantar shear distribution: relevance to diabetic patients. J Biomechanics 2008; 41(3): 556-9.

  21. Garrido DJ, Gil S, Fernández L. EMO desarrolla un calzado para el pie diabético. Rev Biomec 2005; 44(5): 19-22.

  22. Caselli A, Pham H, Giurini JM, Armstrong DG, Veves A. The forefoot-to-rearfoot plantar pressure ratio is increased in severe diabetic neuropathy and can predict foot ulceration. Diabetes Care 2002; 25(6): 1066-71.

  23. Reiber GE, Smith DG, Wallace C, Sullivan K, Hayes S, Vath C, Maciejewski ML, et al. Effect of therapeutic footwear on foot reulceration in patients with diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002; 287(19): 2552-8.

  24. Lott DJ, Hastings MK, Commean PK, Smith KE, Mueller MJ. Effect of footwear and orthotic devices on stress reduction and soft tissue strain of the neuropathic foot. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2007; 22(3): 352-9.

  25. Lavery LA, Armstrong DG, Wunderlich RP, Tredwell J, Boulton AJ. Predictive value of foot pressure assessment as part of a population-based diabetes disease management program. Diabetes Care 2003; 26(4): 1069-73.

  26. Lavery LA, Amstrong DG, Vela SA. Practical Criteria for screening patients at high risk for diabetic foot ulceration. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158: 157-62.

  27. Bowen CJ, Culliford D, Allen R, Beacroft J, Gay A, Hooper L, Burridge J, et al. Forefoot pathology in rheumatoid arthritis identified with ultrasound may not localise to areas of highest pressure: cohort observations at baseline and twelve months. J Foot Ankle Res 2011; 4(1): 25.

  28. Yavuz M, Erdemir A, Botek G, Hirschman GB, Bardsley L, Davis BL. Peak Plantar pressure and shear locations. Diabetes Care 2007; 30(10): 2643-5.

  29. Novel V, Giralt E, De Planell E. Tratamiento preventivo en el pie diabético. El Peu 2002; 22(2): 79-85.

  30. Melai T, IJzerman TH, Schaper NC, de Lange TL, Willems PJ, Meijer K, Lieverse AG, et al. Calculation of plantar pressure time integral, an alternative approach. Gait Posture 2011; 34(3): 379-83.

  31. Waaijman R, Bus SA. The interdependency of peak pressure and pressure-time integral in pressure studies on diabetic footwear: no need to report both parameters. Gait Posture 2012; 35(1): 1-5.

  32. Zachariah SG, Sanders JE. Standing interface stresses as a predictor of walking interface stresses in the trans-tibial prosthesis. Prosthet Orthot Int 2001; 25(1): 34-40.

  33. Goh JC, Lee PV, Chong SY. Comparative study between patellar- tendon-bearing and pressure cast prosthetic sockets. J Rehabil Res Dev 2004; 41(3B): 491-501.

  34. Commuri S, Day J, Dionne C, Ertl WJ. Assessment of pressures within the prosthetic socket of a person with osteomyoplastic amputation during varied walking tasks. JPO 2010; 22(2): 127-37.

  35. Portnoy S, van Haare J, Geers RP, Kristal A, Siev-Ner I, Seelen HA, Oomens CW, et al. Real-time subject-specific analyses of dynamic internal tissue loads in the residual limb of transtibial amputees. Med Eng Phys 2010; 32(4): 312-23.

  36. Sewell P, Noroozi S, Vinney J, Amali R, Andrews S. Static and dynamic pressure prediction for prosthetic socket fitting assessment utilising an inverse problem approach. Artif Intell Med 2012; 54(1): 29-41.

  37. Martínez R, Álvarez M, Urrusti JL, Rodríguez R, Ramírez-Mayorga A. Prototipo para medir y Registrar Presiones en el Pie con Amputación Parcial. XXXII Congreso Nacional de Ingeniería Biomédica 2009. México.

  38. Alvarez M, Rodríguez R, Urrusti JL, Tortolero J, Ramírez-Mayorga A. Software para despliegue y análisis de presiones en muñones de miembros Inferiores. II Congreso Internacional de Investigación en Rehabilitación 2011. México.

  39. Winter D. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement. 3a Ed. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 1990, p. 11-50.

  40. Tagore P. Signal Averaging. En: Tompkins WJ (ed.). Biomedical digital signal processing: C-language examples and laboratory experiments for the IBM PC. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 2000, p. 184-90.

  41. Bowker JH. Partial foot amputations and disarticulations: Surgical aspects. JPO 2007; 19(3S): 62-97.

  42. Sánchez, JJ. Biomecánica de la marcha humana normal. En Biomecánica de la marcha humana normal y patológica. Valencia, España: Instituto de Biomecánica de Valencia; 2005: 45.

  43. Gutiérrez JP, Rivera-Dommarco J, Shamah-Levy T, Villalpando- Hernández S, Franco A, Cuevas-Nasu L, et al. Encuesta Nacional de Salud y Nutrición 2012. Resultados Nacionales. Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, 2012. Disponible en: http://ensanut insp mx/ informes/ENSANUT2012ResultadosNacionales.pdf [Acceso: febrero 2013].




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com