Equivalent running leg lengths require prosthetic legs to be longer than biological legs during standing

We aimed to determine a method for prescribing a standing prosthetic leg length (ProsL) that results in an equivalent running biological leg length (BioL) for athletes with unilateral (UTTA) and bilateral transtibial amputations (BTTA). We measured standing leg length of ten non-amputee (NA) athlete...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Scientific reports 2023-05, Vol.13 (1), p.7679-7679, Article 7679
Hauptverfasser: Zhang-Lea, Janet H., Tacca, Joshua R., Beck, Owen N., Taboga, Paolo, Grabowski, Alena M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We aimed to determine a method for prescribing a standing prosthetic leg length (ProsL) that results in an equivalent running biological leg length (BioL) for athletes with unilateral (UTTA) and bilateral transtibial amputations (BTTA). We measured standing leg length of ten non-amputee (NA) athletes, ten athletes with UTTA, and five athletes with BTTA. All athletes performed treadmill running trials from 3 m/s to their maximum speed. We calculated standing and running BioL and ProsL lengths and assessed the running-to-standing leg length ratio (L ratio ) at three instances during ground contact: touchdown, mid-stance, and take-off. Athletes with UTTA had 2.4 cm longer standing ProsL than BioL length (p = 0.030), but their ProsL length were up to 3.3 cm shorter at touchdown and 4.1 cm shorter at mid-stance than BioL, at 3–11.5 m/s. At touchdown, mid-stance, and take-off, athletes with BTTA had 0.01–0.05 lower L ratio at 3 m/s (p 
ISSN:2045-2322
2045-2322
DOI:10.1038/s41598-023-34346-x