Skip to content

Basic Mobility and Balance Performance of Low Active Transfemoral Prosthesis Users With a Powered Prosthetic Knee

Basic Mobility and Balance Performance of Low Active Transfemoral Prosthesis Users With Mobili Knee (a Powered Microprocessor-controlled Knee Prosthesis)

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04799145
Enrollment
6
Registered
2021-03-16
Start date
2021-02-05
Completion date
2021-02-24
Last updated
2026-01-21

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

Conditions

Amputation, Prosthesis User

Brief summary

This was a prospective case series design investigation with 6 prosthesis user subjects. Subjects performed the Timed up and go (TUG) test and the two minute walk test (2MWT) along with some activities of daily living (ADL), on their prescribed knee as well as the investigational device at two separate visits. Performance was compared and statistically analyzed.

Detailed description

Participants were consented, and all tests were conducted at the Össur Motion lab Grjótháls 1-5, 110 Reykjavik. There were two scheduled study events. At the initial visit, the first study event, for each subject a researcher qualified to obtain informed consent seated the subject and proceeded as described in chapter 13.7 Informed consent in \[2\]. Prior to fitting the subject was asked to provide feedback on their prescribed prosthesis, by filling in a questionnaire and perform AMPro, LCI (modified), TUG test, 2MWT and other validation activities (stand to sit, sit to stand, level ground, stair and ramp walking), as applicable. The users were fitted within the standard methods of prosthetic fitting, alignment, introduction, training and walking on various terrain. After initial fitting subjects carried out validation tasks (stand to sit, sit to stand tasks, level ground walking at different speeds, stair and ramp walking), stroop test (cognitive loading) and FSST on the investigational device, after which they answered an in-house questionnaire to provide feedback. During the second event, subjects were fitted with the investigational device and asked to perform the TUG, 2MWT and any validation tasks that could not be completed at visit 1 on the investigational device due to time restraints or subject condition. If for some reason all tasks could not be completed at visit 1 and 2 due to time restraints or subject condition, a third visit was added. Subjects did not wear the device home between visits. Statistical Considerations: Outcomes were inspected for normality. If the data was deemed to have a normal distribution the hypothesis was tested using a two-tailed, paired t-test (Only hypothesis A and B). If data was deemed non-normal that hypothesis was tested using a Wilcoxon signed rank test. Significance level (alpha) will be set at 0.05. Other endpoints and acceptance criteria were assessed with descriptive statistics only.

Interventions

Motorized microprocessor controlled prosthetic knee.

DEVICEPrescribed device

Passive microprocessor controlled knee and mechanical knee

Sponsors

Össur Iceland ehf
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

prospective case series design, within subject comparison

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* 50Kg\< body weight \< 116Kg * Cognitive ability to understand all instructions and questionnaires in the study; * K1-K2 unilateral transfemoral amputees * Allows for 37mm knee center height to dome of pyramid alignment * Age ≥ 18 years * Willing and able to participate in the study and follow the protocol * Comfortable and stable socket fit (5 or over on the SFCS)

Exclusion criteria

* Users with cognitive impairment * Users aged \<18y * Bilateral amputees * Users with stump pain affecting their functional mobility * Users with socket problems * Users with co-morbidities in the contra-lateral limb, which significantly affect their functional mobility

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Timed Up and Go Test (TUG Test)1 weekSubjects are timed while completing a task of getting up from a chair, walking 3 meters at self-selected walking speed, turning around a cone and returning to sit down in the chair.Time is stopped from leaving the chair until the subject is sitting again. The time is measured in seconds. The faster the subject can complete the task the better. Results correlate with gait speed, balance, functional level, the ability to go out, and can follow change over time. It is assumed that subjects that take longer than 14s to complete the TUG might have a higher risk for falls.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
2 Minute Walk Test1 weekSubjects walk at self-selected walking speed for 2 minutes, they shall walk as far as possible

Baseline characteristics

Characteristic
Age, Continuous63 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4
Ampro33 Total Score
STANDARD_DEVIATION 6
Region of Enrollment
Iceland
6 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
0 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
6 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 6
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 6
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 6

Outcome results

None listed

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