Can external lateral stabilization reduce the energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation?

T. Ijmker, S. Noten, C.J.C. Lamoth, P.J. Beek, L.H.V. van der Woude, J.H.P. Houdijk

    Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    Abstract

    The aim of this study was to examine whether impaired balance control is partly responsible for the increased energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation (LLA). Previous studies used external lateral stabilization to evaluate the energy cost for balance control; this caused a decrease in energy cost, with concomitant decreases in mean and variability of step width. Using a similar set-up, we expected larger decreases for LLA than able-bodied controls.Fifteen transtibial amputees (TT), 12 transfemoral amputees (TF), and 15 able-bodied controls (CO) walked with and without external lateral stabilization provided via spring like cords attached to the waist. Effects of this manipulation on energy cost, step parameters, and pelvic motion were evaluated between groups.TT (-5%) and CO (-3%) showed on average a small reduction in energy cost when walking with stabilization, whereas TF exhibited an increase in energy cost (+6.5%) The difference in the effect of stabilization was only significant between TT and TF. Step width, step width variability, and medio-lateral pelvic displacement decreased significantly with stabilization in all groups, especially in TT.Contrary to expectations, external lateral stabilization did not result in a larger decrease in the energy cost of walking for LLA compared to able-bodied controls, suggesting that balance control is not a major factor in the increased cost of walking in LLA. Alternatively, the increased energy cost with stabilization for TF suggests that restraining (medio-lateral) pelvic motion impeded necessary movement adaptations in LLA, and thus negated the postulated beneficial effects of stabilization on the energy cost of walking.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)616-621
    JournalGait and Posture
    Volume40
    Issue number4
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2014

    Fingerprint

    Amputees
    Amputation
    Walking
    Lower Extremity
    Costs and Cost Analysis
    Cost Control

    Cite this

    Ijmker, T. ; Noten, S. ; Lamoth, C.J.C. ; Beek, P.J. ; van der Woude, L.H.V. ; Houdijk, J.H.P. / Can external lateral stabilization reduce the energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation?. In: Gait and Posture. 2014 ; Vol. 40, No. 4. pp. 616-621.
    @article{43d3ce85aa5649a2b646c720d0052668,
    title = "Can external lateral stabilization reduce the energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation?",
    abstract = "The aim of this study was to examine whether impaired balance control is partly responsible for the increased energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation (LLA). Previous studies used external lateral stabilization to evaluate the energy cost for balance control; this caused a decrease in energy cost, with concomitant decreases in mean and variability of step width. Using a similar set-up, we expected larger decreases for LLA than able-bodied controls.Fifteen transtibial amputees (TT), 12 transfemoral amputees (TF), and 15 able-bodied controls (CO) walked with and without external lateral stabilization provided via spring like cords attached to the waist. Effects of this manipulation on energy cost, step parameters, and pelvic motion were evaluated between groups.TT (-5{\%}) and CO (-3{\%}) showed on average a small reduction in energy cost when walking with stabilization, whereas TF exhibited an increase in energy cost (+6.5{\%}) The difference in the effect of stabilization was only significant between TT and TF. Step width, step width variability, and medio-lateral pelvic displacement decreased significantly with stabilization in all groups, especially in TT.Contrary to expectations, external lateral stabilization did not result in a larger decrease in the energy cost of walking for LLA compared to able-bodied controls, suggesting that balance control is not a major factor in the increased cost of walking in LLA. Alternatively, the increased energy cost with stabilization for TF suggests that restraining (medio-lateral) pelvic motion impeded necessary movement adaptations in LLA, and thus negated the postulated beneficial effects of stabilization on the energy cost of walking.",
    author = "T. Ijmker and S. Noten and C.J.C. Lamoth and P.J. Beek and {van der Woude}, L.H.V. and J.H.P. Houdijk",
    year = "2014",
    doi = "10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.07.013",
    language = "English",
    volume = "40",
    pages = "616--621",
    journal = "Gait and Posture",
    issn = "0966-6362",
    publisher = "Elsevier",
    number = "4",

    }

    Can external lateral stabilization reduce the energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation? / Ijmker, T.; Noten, S.; Lamoth, C.J.C.; Beek, P.J.; van der Woude, L.H.V.; Houdijk, J.H.P.

    In: Gait and Posture, Vol. 40, No. 4, 2014, p. 616-621.

    Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Can external lateral stabilization reduce the energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation?

    AU - Ijmker, T.

    AU - Noten, S.

    AU - Lamoth, C.J.C.

    AU - Beek, P.J.

    AU - van der Woude, L.H.V.

    AU - Houdijk, J.H.P.

    PY - 2014

    Y1 - 2014

    N2 - The aim of this study was to examine whether impaired balance control is partly responsible for the increased energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation (LLA). Previous studies used external lateral stabilization to evaluate the energy cost for balance control; this caused a decrease in energy cost, with concomitant decreases in mean and variability of step width. Using a similar set-up, we expected larger decreases for LLA than able-bodied controls.Fifteen transtibial amputees (TT), 12 transfemoral amputees (TF), and 15 able-bodied controls (CO) walked with and without external lateral stabilization provided via spring like cords attached to the waist. Effects of this manipulation on energy cost, step parameters, and pelvic motion were evaluated between groups.TT (-5%) and CO (-3%) showed on average a small reduction in energy cost when walking with stabilization, whereas TF exhibited an increase in energy cost (+6.5%) The difference in the effect of stabilization was only significant between TT and TF. Step width, step width variability, and medio-lateral pelvic displacement decreased significantly with stabilization in all groups, especially in TT.Contrary to expectations, external lateral stabilization did not result in a larger decrease in the energy cost of walking for LLA compared to able-bodied controls, suggesting that balance control is not a major factor in the increased cost of walking in LLA. Alternatively, the increased energy cost with stabilization for TF suggests that restraining (medio-lateral) pelvic motion impeded necessary movement adaptations in LLA, and thus negated the postulated beneficial effects of stabilization on the energy cost of walking.

    AB - The aim of this study was to examine whether impaired balance control is partly responsible for the increased energy cost of walking in persons with a lower limb amputation (LLA). Previous studies used external lateral stabilization to evaluate the energy cost for balance control; this caused a decrease in energy cost, with concomitant decreases in mean and variability of step width. Using a similar set-up, we expected larger decreases for LLA than able-bodied controls.Fifteen transtibial amputees (TT), 12 transfemoral amputees (TF), and 15 able-bodied controls (CO) walked with and without external lateral stabilization provided via spring like cords attached to the waist. Effects of this manipulation on energy cost, step parameters, and pelvic motion were evaluated between groups.TT (-5%) and CO (-3%) showed on average a small reduction in energy cost when walking with stabilization, whereas TF exhibited an increase in energy cost (+6.5%) The difference in the effect of stabilization was only significant between TT and TF. Step width, step width variability, and medio-lateral pelvic displacement decreased significantly with stabilization in all groups, especially in TT.Contrary to expectations, external lateral stabilization did not result in a larger decrease in the energy cost of walking for LLA compared to able-bodied controls, suggesting that balance control is not a major factor in the increased cost of walking in LLA. Alternatively, the increased energy cost with stabilization for TF suggests that restraining (medio-lateral) pelvic motion impeded necessary movement adaptations in LLA, and thus negated the postulated beneficial effects of stabilization on the energy cost of walking.

    U2 - 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.07.013

    DO - 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.07.013

    M3 - Article

    VL - 40

    SP - 616

    EP - 621

    JO - Gait and Posture

    JF - Gait and Posture

    SN - 0966-6362

    IS - 4

    ER -