A comparison of two different prosthetic feet on functional capacity, pain severity, satisfaction level and quality of life in high activity patients with unilateral traumatic transtibial amputation.

AIM: Prescribing optimal prosthetic feet to ensure successful rehabilitation is difficult since there are no generally established clinical guidelines based on objective data. The aim of the study was to compare functional capacity, pain intensity, satisfaction level and quality of life (QoL) of high activity patients with unilateral transtibial amputation using non-articulated carbon foot (non-articulating ankle, NAA) with those of using carbon foot with hydraulic ankle (articulating hydraulic ankle, AHA).

METHODS

Forty-two patients (21 with NAA and 21 with AHA) with unilateral transtibial traumatic amputation from tertiary rehabilitation center were participated in this cross-sectional study. Outcome measures were six-minute walking test (6MWT), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the Short Form-36 (SF-36). The level of difficulty experienced during ambulating on different terrains was recorded on a 5-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

There were no significant statistical differences in 6MWT, pain intensity, prosthetic foot satisfaction level and QoL between the two groups. The level of difficulty experienced during descending ramps was higher in the NAA group than in the AHA group (p = 0.016). The most common reason for dissatisfaction were inflexibility for the NAA group (14.3%), frequent dysfunction for the AHA group (28.6%).

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that the level of difficulty experienced during descending ramps was higher in the NAA group than in the AHA group. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed comparing microprocessor AHAs with NAA and AHA.