prosthetic suspension system

Effects of two different prosthetic suspension systems on lower limb amputee's gait performance and satisfaction.

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Interventional

Source

IRCT

Registry ID

IRCT2014012816395N1

Enrollment

Registered

2014-02-16

Start date

2011-01-01

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2018-02-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Lower limb amputation. Amputation at level between knee and ankle

Interventions

Intervention 1: Transtibial prosthetic suspension system (Dermo liner with pin lock ). Intervention 2: Transtibial prosthetic suspension system (Seal-in liner with valve).

Rehabilitation

Transtibial prosthetic suspension system (Dermo liner with pin lock )

Transtibial prosthetic suspension system (Seal-in liner with valve)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Age

18 Years to 80 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: The inclusion criteria for the study consisted of person with trans-tibial amputation, walking without walking aids, steady limb volume during the previous year, pain- and ulcer-free stump, and stump length of more than 11 cm.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria:

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Ambulation. Timepoint: 4 weeks after use. Method of measurement: kinematic & kinetic gait analysis.	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Interface pressure. Timepoint: 4 weeks after use. Method of measurement: Pressure mapping.	—

Countries

Malaysia

Contacts

Public ContactProf.Noor Azuan Abu Osman

Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Ma

azuan@um.edu.my006379675201

Outcome results

None listed

Source: IRCT (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Mar 20, 2026