Skip to content

Vacuum Suspension: Effects on Tissue Oxygenation, Activity and Fit

Vacuum Suspension: Effects on Tissue Oxygenation, Activity and Fit

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT00117793
Enrollment
20
Registered
2005-07-08
Start date
2005-08-31
Completion date
2008-09-30
Last updated
2014-08-15

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

Conditions

Amputation, Diabetes, Leg Injuries, Traumatic Amputations

Keywords

Amputee, Artificial limbs, Gait, Walking

Brief summary

The fit of the residual limb within a prosthetic socket is a primary concern for many amputees. A poor fit can lead to skin irritation, tissue breakdown, and pain. Further, amputees with diabetes or vascular dysfunction often have difficulty maintaining healthy residual limb tissue; a condition that could be mitigated by the application of negative pressure (i.e., vacuum suspension). The aim of this research is to characterize the residual limb response to a vacuum suspension system and to measure prosthetic performance in comparison to a typical suction suspension system. The proposed research plan involves two sets of human subject experiments: (1) prospective, randomized cross-over study to quantify performance of a vacuum suspension system as compared to a total surface bearing suction socket in terms of pistoning, maintaining limb volume, step counts, and subjective measures of fit and (2) measurement of transcutaneous oxygen tension as a function of vacuum pressure.

Detailed description

A proper fitting prosthetic socket provides the amputee with a comfortable system allowing them to pursue many of their desired vocational and recreational goals. Unfortunately, many amputees live with an ill-fitting socket and can experience limb pistoning within the socket, which in turn may result in skin irritation, tissue breakdown, discomfort, and a reduction in activity. One of the key factors affecting fit is intraday residual limb volume changes. For an amputee with dysvascular conditions, the implications of a poor fitting socket are exacerbated by poor circulation, reduced healing potential and the compressive forces exerted by their prosthesis. Vacuum suspension systems may have the potential to alleviate these conditions for healthy and dysvascular amputees. The purported benefits of vacuum suspension systems include, but are not limited to: improved suspension (reduction in the amount of pistoning), maintenance of limb volume throughout the day, and increased tissue oxygenation to the residual limb. Our first objective is to characterize performance, as related to socket fit, of a vacuum suspension system using objective and subjective measures. We will do this by conducting a within-subject experiment to measure pistoning in three dimensions while walking, overall and regional changes in limb volume before and after a thirty-minute treadmill walk, mobility (step counts) and the perception of socket fit (questionnaire) as a function of prosthetic prescription (vacuum suspension system vs. total surface bearing suction socket). Our second objective is to determine the effect of pressures within a prosthetic socket on residual limb transcutaneous oxygen tension (tcpO2) levels. We will conduct laboratory-based, in situ testing to determine how the transcutaneous oxygen tension levels, at six sites on the residual limb, respond to pressures simulating those within a vacuum suspension system and a total surface bearing suction socket. The proposed research will allow us to understand how suspension systems influence prosthetic socket fit and residual limb tissue health and to formulate a knowledge base on two suspension systems providing prosthetists and clinicians the objective data to make better prescription decisions. In addition, the methods utilized in this study (e.g., a residual limb limb volume scanner and assessing dynamic pistoning) can be used to study current and novel suspension systems, liners, and prosthetic socket designs to provide a standard for comparison.

Interventions

DEVICETotal Surface Bearing Suction Socket

Current clinical practice

DEVICEVacuum assisted socket system

Novel socket system

Sponsors

US Department of Veterans Affairs
Lead SponsorFED

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* Over 18 and less than 70 years of age, * Have a below knee amputation involving only one side, * If the cause of amputation was for traumatic reasons and do not have diabetes or a vascular condition, the amputation must have occurred at least six months ago and the potential subject must have worn a prosthesis for at least four months, * If the cause of amputation was for diabetes or vascular reasons, the potential subject must have been fit with a prosthesis and have worn it for at least one year, * Wear the prosthesis for at least 6 hours a day, * Able to walk without a cane, crutches, or a walker, * Are moderately active enough to walk at a steady pace for at least 30 minutes.

Exclusion criteria

* Have pain in legs or any condition that interferes with walking. * Have an ulcer on the residual limb, * If potential subject had an amputation because of a tumor or an infection, no longer have an active tumor or undergoing treatment for a tumor, * Have fallen within the last 3 months.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Limb VolumeMeasurements were taken after wearing the study prostheses for three weeks
Activity LevelTwo weeksTotal number of steps during a two week period ending in the fourth week for each study prosthesis (PIN and VASS).
Limb PistoningMeasurements were taken after wearing the study prosthesis for three weeksLimb pistoning is the change in the resultant distance between the prosthetic-side knee joint marker triad and the residual limb thigh triad measured using a 12-camera motion analysis system while subjects weighted and un-weighted their prosthesis standing in place.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Residual Limb Health (PEQ Scale)Measurements were taken after wearing the study prosthesis for four weeksQualitative differences between the study limbs were assessed using the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ). This standardized, self-report instrument is specific to persons with lower limb amputations and is used to evaluate prosthetic care with regard to prescription and prosthesis-related quality of life. The Residual Limb Health scale examines: sweat, smell, volume changes, rashes, ingrown hairs, and blisters. The scale is scored from 0 to 100 where 100 indicates the best outcome (i.e., most healthful).
Ambulation (PEQ Scale)Measurements were taken after wearing the study prosthesis for four weeksQualitative differences between the study limbs were assessed using the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ). This standardized, self-report instrument is specific to persons with lower limb amputations and is used to evaluate prosthetic care with regard to prescription and prosthesis-related quality of life. The Ambulation scale queries the ability to walk in general, in close spaces, on stairs and ramps, in urban environments, and on slippery surfaces. The scale is scored from 0 to 100 where 100 indicates the best outcome (i.e., easiest to walk on).
Frustration (PEQ Scale)Measurements were taken after wearing the study prosthesis for four weeksQualitative differences between the study limbs were assessed using the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ). This standardized, self-report instrument is specific to persons with lower limb amputations and is used to evaluate prosthetic care with regard to prescription and prosthesis-related quality of life. Frustration was assessed by frequency of occurrence and rating. The scale is scored from 0 to 100 where 100 indicates the best outcome (i.e., least frustrating).

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Recruitment for this study was conducted at the VA Puget Sound Health Care System (Seattle VA hospital). Recruitment began on March 28, 2007. The study was closed to enrollment on March 30, 2012.

Pre-assignment details

The prostheses used in this study were built and aligned by a certified and licensed prosthetist prior to beginning starting the protocol. 20 individuals gave informed consent but 3 withdrew prior to starting: 1 had contralateral knee surgery, 1 became a bi-lateral amputee, and 1 was withdrawn by the participant's physician.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Entire Study Population
Includes participants randomized to receive PIN first and VASS first.
5
Total5

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject12

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicEntire Study Population
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
5 Participants
Age, Continuous56 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9
Amputation etiology
Diabetic
1 Participants
Amputation etiology
Traumatic
4 Participants
Height1.78 m
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.11
Sex: Female, Male
Female
0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
5 Participants
Weight84 kg
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11
Years post-amputation13 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
1 / 17
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 17

Outcome results

Primary

Activity Level

Total number of steps during a two week period ending in the fourth week for each study prosthesis (PIN and VASS).

Time frame: Two weeks

Population: The number of participants for analysis is equal to the number of participants who completed the study protocol.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PIN SuspensionActivity Level73 steps (in thousands)Standard Deviation 18
VASS SuspensionActivity Level38 steps (in thousands)Standard Deviation 9
p-value: =0.0056Mixed Models Analysis
Primary

Limb Pistoning

Limb pistoning is the change in the resultant distance between the prosthetic-side knee joint marker triad and the residual limb thigh triad measured using a 12-camera motion analysis system while subjects weighted and un-weighted their prosthesis standing in place.

Time frame: Measurements were taken after wearing the study prosthesis for three weeks

Population: The number of participants for analysis is equal to the number of participants who completed the study protocol.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PIN SuspensionLimb Pistoning6 mmStandard Deviation 4
VASS SuspensionLimb Pistoning1 mmStandard Deviation 3
p-value: =0.0021Mixed Models Analysis
Primary

Limb Volume

Time frame: Measurements were taken after wearing the study prostheses for three weeks

Population: The number of participants for analysis is equal to the number of participants who completed the study protocol.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PIN SuspensionLimb Volume0.68 litersStandard Deviation 0.14
VASS SuspensionLimb Volume0.72 litersStandard Deviation 0.13
p-value: >0.05Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Ambulation (PEQ Scale)

Qualitative differences between the study limbs were assessed using the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ). This standardized, self-report instrument is specific to persons with lower limb amputations and is used to evaluate prosthetic care with regard to prescription and prosthesis-related quality of life. The Ambulation scale queries the ability to walk in general, in close spaces, on stairs and ramps, in urban environments, and on slippery surfaces. The scale is scored from 0 to 100 where 100 indicates the best outcome (i.e., easiest to walk on).

Time frame: Measurements were taken after wearing the study prosthesis for four weeks

Population: The number of participants for analysis is equal to the number of participants who completed the study protocol.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PIN SuspensionAmbulation (PEQ Scale)95 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6
VASS SuspensionAmbulation (PEQ Scale)67 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22
Secondary

Frustration (PEQ Scale)

Qualitative differences between the study limbs were assessed using the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ). This standardized, self-report instrument is specific to persons with lower limb amputations and is used to evaluate prosthetic care with regard to prescription and prosthesis-related quality of life. Frustration was assessed by frequency of occurrence and rating. The scale is scored from 0 to 100 where 100 indicates the best outcome (i.e., least frustrating).

Time frame: Measurements were taken after wearing the study prosthesis for four weeks

Population: The number of participants for analysis is equal to the number of participants who completed the study protocol.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PIN SuspensionFrustration (PEQ Scale)91 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 11
VASS SuspensionFrustration (PEQ Scale)43 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 29
Secondary

Residual Limb Health (PEQ Scale)

Qualitative differences between the study limbs were assessed using the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ). This standardized, self-report instrument is specific to persons with lower limb amputations and is used to evaluate prosthetic care with regard to prescription and prosthesis-related quality of life. The Residual Limb Health scale examines: sweat, smell, volume changes, rashes, ingrown hairs, and blisters. The scale is scored from 0 to 100 where 100 indicates the best outcome (i.e., most healthful).

Time frame: Measurements were taken after wearing the study prosthesis for four weeks

Population: The number of participants for analysis is equal to the number of participants who completed the study protocol.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
PIN SuspensionResidual Limb Health (PEQ Scale)90 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5
VASS SuspensionResidual Limb Health (PEQ Scale)77 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026