Trial reportJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2021
The influence of powered prostheses on user perspectives, metabolics, and activity: a randomized crossover trial.
Trial report in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02828982 (Determining the Potential Benefit of Powered Prostheses), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Determining the Potential Benefit of Powered Prostheses
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A review of user needs to drive the development of lower limb prostheses.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- User accommodation to an active microprocessor-controlled knee in individuals with unilateral transfemoral amputation: a 5-week non-randomized trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Lower-limb prosthetic mechanisms: recent progress, control innovations and barriers to real-world adoption.Biomedical engineering online · 2026Review
- Effects of prosthetic ankle power and foot stiffness category on biomechanical asymmetry and knee moment during walking at different speeds.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Using EMG Biofeedback to Restore Closed-Loop Neural Control on a Powered Prosthetic Ankle.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026Article
- Evaluation of a Portable Bionic Ankle Prosthesis Under Direct Continuous Electromyography Control for Quiet Standing Tasks.Journal of prosthetics and orthotics : JPO · 2025Article
- Modeling the biomechanical features affecting the metabolic rate of walking with a powered ankle-foot prosthesis.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2025Article
- Human factors considerations of Interaction between wearers and intelligent lower-limb prostheses: a prospective discussion.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Review
- Article
- Gait quality in prosthesis users is reflected by force-based metrics when learning to walk on a new research-grade powered prosthesis.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024Article
- Walking Ankle Biomechanics of Individuals With Transtibial Amputations Using a Prescribed Prosthesis and a Portable Bionic Prosthesis Under Myoelectric Control.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2024Article
- Greater than recommended stiffness and power setting of a stance-phase powered leg prosthesis can improve step-to-step transition work and effective foot length ratio during walking in people with transtibial amputation.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- A Scientometric Analysis and Visualization of Prosthetic Foot Research Work: 2000 to 2022.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Design, Control, and Evaluation of a Robotic Ankle-Foot Prosthesis Emulator.IEEE transactions on medical robotics and bionics · 2023Article
- Development of an item bank for measuring prosthetic mobility in people with lower limb amputation: The Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M).PM & R : the journal of injury, function, and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Gait Alteration in Individual with Limb Loss: The Role of Inertial Sensors.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- A passive dorsiflexing ankle prosthesis to increase minimum foot clearance during swing.Wearable technologies · 2023Article
- A lightweight robotic leg prosthesis replicating the biomechanics of the knee, ankle, and toe joint.Science robotics · 2022Article
- Robotic Emulation of Candidate Prosthetic Foot Designs May Enable Efficient, Evidence-Based, and Individualized Prescriptions.Journal of prosthetics and orthotics : JPO · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPowered prosthetic ankles provide battery-powered mechanical push-off, with the aim of reducing the metabolic demands of walking for people with transtibial amputations. The efficacy of powered ankles has been shown in active, high functioning individuals with transtibial amputation, but is less clear in other populations. Additionally, it is unclear how use of a powered prosthesis influences everyday physical activity and mobility.
methodsIndividuals with unilateral transtibial amputations participated in a randomized clinical trial comparing their prescribed, unpowered prosthesis and the BiOM powered prosthesis. Participants' metabolic costs and self-selected walking speeds were measured in the laboratory and daily step count, daily steps away from home, and walking speed were measured over two weeks of at-home prosthesis use. Participants also rated their perception of mobility and quality of life and provided free-form feedback. Dependent measures were compared between prostheses and the relationships between metabolic cost, perception of mobility, and characteristics of walking in daily life were explored using Pearson's correlations.
resultsTwelve people were randomly allocated to the powered prosthesis first (n = 7) or unpowered prosthesis first (n = 5) and ten completed the full study. There were no differences in metabolic costs (p = 0.585), daily step count (p = 0.995), walking speed in-lab (p = 0.145) and in daily life (p = 0.226), or perception of mobility between prostheses (p ≥ 0.058). Changes varied across participants, however. There were several medium-sized effects for device comparisons. With the powered prosthesis, participants had increased self-reported ambulation (g = 0.682) and decreased frustration (g = 0.506).
conclusionsThere were no universal benefits of the powered prosthesis on function in the lab or home environment. However, the effects were subject-specific, with some reporting preference for power and improved mobility, and some increasing their activity and decreasing their metabolic effort. Additionally, self-reported preferences did not often correlate with objective measures of function. This highlights the need for future clinical research to include both perception and objective measures to better inform prosthetic prescription.
trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov , #NCT02828982. Registered 12 July 2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02828982.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.