Lower limb amputation Part 3: Prosthetics ‐ a 10 year literature review

References

• Aeyels B, Peeraer K, Van Der Sloten J. Van der Perre G. Development of an above‐knee prosthesis equipped with a microcomputer‐controlled knee joint: first test results. J Biomed Eng 1992; 14: 199–202
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Blumentritt S, Scherer HW, Michael JW, Schwmatz T. Trans‐femoral amputees walking on a rotary hydraulic prosthetic knee mechanism: a preliminary report. J Prosthet Orthot 1998; 10: 61–70
   Google Scholar
• Blumentritt S, Scherer HW, Wellershaus U, Micheal JW. Design principles, biomechanical data and clinical experience with a polycentric knee offering controlled stance phase knee flexion: a preliminary report. J Prosthet Orthot 1997; 9: 18–24
   Google Scholar
• Buckley JG, Spence WD, Solomonidis SE. Energy cost of walking: comparison of “Intelligent Prosthesis” with conventional mechanism. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997; 78: 330–333
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlson JM, Wood SL. A flexible, air‐permeable socket prosthesis for bilateral hip disarticulation and hemicorporectomy amputees. J Prosthet Orthot 1998; 10: 110–115
   Google Scholar
• Chakraborty JK, Patil KM. A new modular six‐bar linkage trans‐femoral prosthesis forwalking and squatting. Prosthet Orthot Int 1994; 18: 98–108
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietzen CJ, Harshberger J, Pidikiti RD. Suction sock suspension for above‐knee prostheses. J Prosthet Orthot 1991; 3: 90–93
   Google Scholar
• Emrich R, Slater K. Comparative analysis of below‐knee prosthetic socket liner materials. J Med Eng Technol 1998; 22: 94–98
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engsberg JR, Clynch GS, Lee AG, Allan JS, Harder JA. A CAD/CAM method for custom below‐knee sockets. Prosthet Orthot Int 1992; 16: 183–188
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman D, Wontorcik L. Stereolithography and prosthetic test socket manufacture: a cost/benefit analysis. J Prosthet Orthot 1998; 10: 17–20
   Google Scholar
• Haberman LJ, Bedotto RA, Colodney EJ. Silicone‐only suspension (SOS) for the above‐knee amputee. J Prosthet Orthot 1992; 4: 76–85
   Google Scholar
• Hastings JA, Vannah WM, Stand JA, Harning DM, Drvaric DM. Frequency content of prosthetic and orthotic shapes: a requirement for CAD/CAM digitizer performance. J Prosthet Orthot 1998; 10: 2–6
   Google Scholar
• Houston VL, Burgess EM, Childress DS, Lehneis HR, Mason CP, Garbarini MA, Lablanc KP, Boone DA, Chan RB, Harlan JH, Brncick MD. Automated fabrication of mobility aids (AFMA): Below‐knee CASD/CAM testing and evaluation program results. J Rehabil Res Dev 1992; 29((4))78–124
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lake C, Supan TJ. The incidence of dermatological problems in the silicone suspension sleeve user. J Prosthet Orthot 1997; 9: 97–106
   Google Scholar
• Layton H. A vacuum donning procedure for trans‐femoral suction suspension prostheses. J Prosthet Orthot 1998; 10: 21–24
   Google Scholar
• Lim PAC. Advances in prosthetics: a clinical perspective. Phys Med Rehabil: State Art Rev 1997; 11: 13–33
   Google Scholar
• Madigan RR, Fillauer KD. 3‐S prosthesis: a preliminary report. J Pediatr Orthop 1991; 11: 112–117
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michael JW. Modern prosthetic knee mechanisms. Clin Orthop 1999; 361: 39–47
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michael JW. Prosthetic knee mechanisms. Phys Med Rehabil: State Art Rev 1994; 8: 147–164
   Google Scholar
• Patil KM, Chakraborty JK. Analysis of a new polycentric above‐knee prosthesis with a pneumatic swing phase control. J Biomech 1991; 24: 223–233
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pitkin MR. Synthesis of a cycloidal mechanism of the prosthetic ankle. Prosthet Orthot Int 1996; 20: 159–171
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Postema K, Hermens HJ, De Vries J, Koopman HFJM, Eisma WH. Energy storage and release of prosthetic feet part 1:‐biomechanical analysis related to user benefits. Prosthet Orthot Int 1997; 21: 17–27
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Postema K, Hermens HJ, De Vries S J, Koopman HFJM, Eisma WH. Energy storage and release of prosthetic feet part 2:‐subjective ratings of 2 energy storing and 2 conventional feet, user choice of foot and deciding factor. Prosthet Orthot Int 1997; 21: 28–34
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Radcliffe CW. Four‐bar linkage prosthetic knee mechanisms: kinematics, alignment and prescription criteria. Prosthet Orthot Int 1994; 18: 159–173
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romo HD. Specialised prostheses for activities. Clin Orthop 1999; 361: 63–70
   Google Scholar
• Sabolich J. Prosthetic advances in lower extremity amputation. Phys Med Rehabil Clin North Am 1991; 2: 415–422
   Google Scholar
• Schuch CM. Thermoplastic applications in lower extremity prosthetics. J Prosthet Orthot 1990; 3: 1–8
   Google Scholar
• Taylor MB, Clark E, Offord EA, Baxter C. A comparison of energy expnditure by a high level trans‐femoral amputee using the Intelligent Prosthesis and conventionally dampened prosthetic limbs. Prosthet Orthot Int 1996; 20: 116–121
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torres‐Moreno R, Morrison JB, Cooper D, Saunders CG, Foort J. A computer‐aided socket design procedure for above‐knee prostheses. J Rehabil Res Dev 1992; 29: 35–44
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vannier MW, Commean PK, Smith KE. Three‐dimensional lower‐extremity residua measurement systems error analysis. J Prosthet Orthot 1997; 9: 67–76
   Google Scholar
• Verhoeff TT, Poetsma PA, Gasser L, Tung H. Evaluation of use and durability of polypropylene trans‐tibial prostheses. Prosthet Orthot Int 1999; 23: 249–255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar