Design of lower limb prosthetic sockets: a review

References

• Bulletin of main data of the second national sampling survey on disabled persons in 2006 (No.2) [EB/OL]. 2006. Available from: http://www.gov.cn/fwxx/cjr/content_1308391.htm
   Google Scholar
• International L. Why limbs. 2015. Available from: https://www.limbsinternational.org/why-limbs.php
   Google Scholar
• Moran CW. Revolutionizing prosthetics 2009 modular prosthetic limb-body interface: overview of the prosthetic socket development. Johns Hopkins APL Tech Dig. 2011;30(3):240–249.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, et al. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(3):422–429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• L C. The evolution of upper limb prosthetic socket design. J Prosthetics Orthotics. 2008;20(3):85–92.
   Google Scholar
• Chow A, Mayer EK, Darzi AW, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures: the importance of patient satisfaction in surgery. Surgery. 2009;146(3):435–443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pirouzi G, Abu Osman NA, Eshraghi A, et al. Review of the socket design and interface pressure measurement for transtibial prosthesis. Scientific World J. 2014;2014. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/849073
   Google Scholar
• Hanspal RS, Fisher K, Nieveen R. Prosthetic socket fit comfort score. Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25(22):1278–1280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick R. Surveys of patients satisfaction: i–Important general considerations. BMJ. 1991;302(6781):887–889.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meulenbelt HEJ. Skin problems of the stump in lower limb amputees. University of Groningen; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Meulenbelt HEJ, Geertzen JHB, Jonkman MF, et al. Skin problems of the stump in lower limb amputees: 1. A clinical study. Acta Derm Venereol. 2011;91(2):173–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koc E, Tunca M, Akar A, et al. Skin problems in amputees: a descriptive study. Int J Dermatol. 2008;47(5):463–466.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dudek NL, Marks MB, Marshall SC, et al. Dermatologic conditions associated with use of a lower-extremity prosthesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(4):659–663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colgecen E, Korkmaz M, Ozyurt K, et al. A clinical evaluation of skin disorders of lower limb amputation sites. Int J Dermatol. 2016;55:468–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boer J, Nazary M, Riis PT. The role of mechanical stress in hidradenitis suppurativa. Dermatol Clin. 2016;34(1):37-+.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meulenbelt HEJ, Dijkstra PU, Jonkman MF, et al. Skin problems in lower limb amputees: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2006;28(10):603–608.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller WC, Speechley M, Deathe B. The prevalence and risk factors of falling and fear of falling among lower extremity amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;82(8):1031–1037.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Montero-Odasso M, Schapira M, Soriano ER, et al. Gait velocity as a single predictor of adverse events in healthy seniors aged 75 years and older. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2005;60(10):1304–1309.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Czerniecki JM. Rehabilitation in limb deficiency. 1. Gait and motion analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;77(3 Suppl):S3–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyon CC, Kulkarni J, Zimerson E, et al. Skin disorders in amputees. J Am Soc Dermatol. 2000;42:501–507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mak AFT, Zhang M, Boone DA. State-of-the-art research in lower-limb prosthetic biomechanicssocket interface: a review. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001;38(2): 161–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boone DA, Kobayashi T, Chou TG, et al. Influence of malalignment on socket reaction moments during gait in amputees with transtibial prostheses. Gait Posture. 2013;37(4):620–626.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jonkergouw N, Prins MR, Buis AWP, et al. The effect of alignment changes on unilateral transtibial amputee’s gait: a systematic review. Plos One. 2016;11(12):e0167466.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hashimoto H, Kobayashi T, Gao F, et al. The effect of transverse prosthetic alignment changes on socket reaction moments during gait in individuals with transtibial amputation. Gait Posture. 2018;65:8–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norvell DC, Czerniecki JM, Reiber GE, et al. The prevalence of knee pain and symptomatic knee osteoarthritis among veteran traumatic amputees and nonamputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(3):487–493.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Em H, Sanaz H. Long-term outcomes of unilateral transtibial amputations. Mil Med. 2009;174:6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Struyf PA, van Heugten CM, Hitters MW, et al. The prevalence of osteoarthritis of the intact hip and knee among traumatic leg amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(3):440–446.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proebsting E, Blumentritt S, Kannenberg A. Changes in the locomotor system as a consequence of amputation of a lower limb. Z Orthop Unfall. 2017;155(1):77–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morgenroth DC, Gellhorn AC, Suri P. Osteoarthritis in the disabled population: a mechanical perspective. Pm&R. 2012;4(5):S20–S27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mak AFT, Zhang M, Boone DA. State-of-the-art research in lower-limb prosthetic biomechanics-socket interface: a review. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001;38(2):161–173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heitzmann DWW, Pieschel K, Alimusaj M, et al. Functional effects of a prosthetic torsion adapter in trans-tibial amputees during unplanned spin and step turns. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2016;40(5):558–565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baars ECT, Geertzen JHB. Literature review of the possible advantages of silicon liner socket use in trans-tibial prostheses. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2005;29(1):27–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klute GK, Glaister BC, Berge JS. Prosthetic liners for lower limb amputees: a review of the literature. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2010;34(2):146–153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Board WJ, Street GM, Caspers C. A comparison of trans-tibial amputee suction and vacuum socket conditions. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2001;25(3):202–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klute GK, Berge JS, Biggs W, et al. Vacuum-assisted socket suspension compared with pin suspension for lower extremity amputees: effect on fit, activity, and limb volume. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(10):1570–1575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Darter BJ, Sinitski K, Wilken JM. Axial bone-socket displacement for persons with a traumatic transtibial amputation: The effect of elevated vacuum suspension at progressive body-weight loads. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2016;40(5):552–557.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maria J, Gerschutz P, Michael L, et al. Dynamic effectiveness evaluation of elevated vacuum suspension. J Prosthetics Orthotics. 2015;27(4):161–165.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson A, Dillon MP. User experience of transtibial prosthetic liners: a systematic review. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2017;41(1):6–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paterno L, Ibrahimi M, Gruppioni E, et al. Sockets for limb prostheses: a review of existing technologies and open challenges. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2018;65(9):1996–2010.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaffalitzky E, Gallagher P, MacLachlan M, et al. Developing consensus on important factors associated with lower limb prosthetic prescription and use. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34(24):2085–2094.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klute GK, Kantor C, Darrouzet C, et al. Lower-limb amputee needs assessment using multistakeholder focus-group approach. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2009;46(3):293–304.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pezzin LE, Dillingham TR, MacKenzie EJ, et al. Use and satisfaction with prosthetic limb devices and related services. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(5):723–729.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders JE, Fatone S. Residual limb volume change: systematic review of measurement and management. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48(8):949–986.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janchai S, Boonhong J, Tiamprasit J. Comparison of removable rigid dressing and elastic bandage in reducing the residual limb volume of below knee amputees. J Med Assoc Thai. 2008;91(9):1441–1446.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Paterno L, Ibrahimi M, Rosini E, et al. Residual limb volume fluctuations in transfemoral amputees. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1). DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-91647-9
   Google Scholar
• Greenwald RM, Dean RC, Board WJ. Volume management: smart variable geometry socket (SVGS) technology for lower-limb prostheses. Tech Note. 2003;15(3):107–112.
   Google Scholar
• Joshua Friscia MH, Myers M, Zizmor J. Dynamic adjustable prosthetic socket. Worcester Polyteching Institute; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Pirouzi G, Abu Osman NA, Oshkour AA, et al. Development of an air pneumatic suspension system for transtibial prostheses. Sensors. 2014;14(9):16754–16765.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Candrea D, Sharma A, Osborn L, et al. An adaptable prosthetic socket: regulating independent air bladders through closed-loop control. 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Carrigan W, Nothnagle C, Savant P, et al. Ieee. Pneumatic actuator inserts for interface pressure mapping and fit improvement in lower extremity prosthetics. 2016 6th Ieee International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics Singapore; 2016. p. 574–579.
   Google Scholar
• Mercier M, Shirley C, Stafford S, et al. Fluidic flexible matrix composites for volume management in prosthetic sockets. Proceedings of the Asme Conference on Smart Materials Adaptive Structures and Intelligent Systems Newport, RI, Vol. 2; 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Ogawa A, Obinata G, Hase K, et al. Ieee. Design of lower limb prosthesis with contact pressure adjustment by MR fluid. 2008 30th Annual International Conference of the Ieee Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society Vancouver, CANADA, Vol. 1–8; 2008. p. 330-+
   Google Scholar
• Alley RD, Williams TW 3rd, Albuquerque MJ, et al. Prosthetic sockets stabilized by alternating areas of tissue compression and release. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48(6):679–696.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meng Z, Wong DW-C, Zhang M, et al. Analysis of compression/release stabilized transfemoral prosthetic socket by finite element modelling method. Med Eng Phys. 2020;83:123–129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders JE, Garbini JL, McLean JB, et al. A motor-driven adjustable prosthetic socket operated using a mobile phone app: a technical note. Med Eng Phys. 2019;68:94–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillingham T, Kenia J, Shofer F, et al. A prospective assessment of an adjustable, immediate fit, transtibial prosthesis. Pm&R. 2019;11(11):1210–1217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahle JT, Klenow TD, Highsmith MJ. Comparative effectiveness of an adjustable transfemoral prosthetic interface accommodating volume fluctuation: case study. Technol Innov. 2016;18(2):175–183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sang Y, Li X, Luo Y. Characteristics of a volume-adjustable compression chamber for transradial prosthetic interface. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2016;230(7):650–660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Resnik L, Meucci MR, Lieberman-Klinger S, et al. Advanced upper limb prosthetic devices: implications for upper limb prosthetic rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(4):710–717.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tintle SM, Baechler MF, Nanos GP III, et al. Traumatic and trauma-related amputations part II: upper extremity and future directions. J Bone Joint Surgery-Am Volume. 2010;92A(18):2934–2945.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• al JWWe. Development and amputee validation of pressure and shear sensing liner for prosthetic sockets. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Orlando (FL); 2016.
   Google Scholar