References
- McGimpsey G, Bradford TC. Limb prosthetics services and devices. White Paper submitted by Bioengineering Institute Center for Neuroprosthetics, Worcester Polytechnic Institution, 2008, 1–35.
- Shuxian Z, Wanhua Z, Bingheng L. 3D reconstruction of the structure of a residual limb for customising the design of a prosthetic socket. Med Eng Phys. 2005;27:67–74.
- Horne CE, Neil JA. Quality of life in patients with prosthetic legs: a comparison study. JPO. 2009;21:154–159.
- Ministry Of Health Malaysia. National Diabetes Registry Report. Volume 1; 2012. Available from: http://www.moh.gov.my/ (last accessed 7 April 2015).
- Abdullah MNLY, Mey SC. Employment of people with disabilities in Malaysia: drivers and inhibitors. Int J Spec Educ. 2011;26:112–124.
- Pirouzi G, Abu Osman NA, Eshraghi A, et al. Review of the socket design and interface pressure measurement for transtibial prosthesis. Sci World J. 2014;2014:849073.
- Hanspal R, Fisher K, Nieveen R. Prosthetic socket fit comfort score. Dis Rehabilit. 2003;25:1278–1280.
- Boone DA, Coleman KL. Use of the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ). JPO. 2006;18:P68–P79.
- Safer VB, Yavuzer G, Demir SO, et al. The prosthesis evaluation questionnaire: reliability and cross-validation of the Turkish version. J Phys Ther Sci. 2015;27:1677–1680.
- Powell RA, Single M. Methodology matters focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 1996;8:499–504.
- Dillingham TR, Pezzin LE, MacKenzie EJ, et al. Use and satisfaction with prosthetic devices among persons with trauma-related amputations: a long-term outcome study. Am J Phys Med Rehabilitat. 2001;80:563–571.
- Prosthetic and Orthotic Care. Transtibial prosthetics. [Internet]; 2016. Available from: http://www.pandocare.com/transtibial-prosthetics/ (last accessed 12 Sept 2016).
- Sansoni S, Wodehouse A, McFadyen A, et al. The aesthetic appeal of prosthetic limbs and the uncanny valley: the role of personal characteristics in attraction. Int J Design. 2015;9:67–81.
- Jia X, Zhang M, Lee WCC. Load transfer mechanics between trans-tibial prosthetic socket and residual limb-dynamic effects. J Biomech 2004;37:1371–1377.
- Hachisuka K, Dozono K, Ogata H, et al. Total surface bearing below-knee prosthesis: advantages, disadvantages, and clinical implications. Arch Phys Med Rehabilitat. 1998;79:783–789.
- Marks L, Michael J. Science, medicine, and the future: artificial limbs. BMJ. 2001;323:732–735.
- Carroll K. Options in sockets and liners options. In Motion Mag. 2009:19:19–22.
- Smith DG. Transtibial amputations: successes and challenges. inMotion. 2003;13:57–63.
- Nithin R. Study on use of natural fiber composites in prosthetic. Technical report, November 2014, 0–21.
- Rosalam Che M, Rahinah Ibrahim PMT. Natural based biocomposite material for prosthetic socket fabrication. Alam Cipta. 2012;5:27–34.
- Colombo G, Filippi S, Rizzi C, et al. A new design paradigm for the development of custom-fit soft sockets for lower limb prostheses. Comput Ind. 2010;61:513–523.
- Silver-Thorn MB. Design of artificial limbs for lower extremity amputees. Standard handbook of biomedical engineering and design. McGraw-Hill: New York; 2004:1–30.
- Tanner JE, Berke GM. Radiographic comparison of vertical tibial translation using two types of suspension on a transtibial prosthesis: a case study. JPO. 2001;13:14–16.
- Cairns N, Murray K, Corney J, et al. Satisfaction with cosmesis and priorities for cosmesis design reported by lower limb amputees in the United Kingdom: Instrument development and results. J Prosthet Orthot Int. 2014;38:467–473.
- Kaczkowski M, Edward Jeffries GM. Cosmesis is much more than appearance… it’s function. inMotion. 1999;9:1–48.