Skip to content

An Investigation on Function and Performance of a New Microprocessor Controlled Prosthetic Knee

An Investigation on Function and Performance of a New Microprocessor-controlled Prosthetic Knee

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05523349
Enrollment
14
Registered
2022-08-31
Start date
2022-08-15
Completion date
2022-09-30
Last updated
2026-02-02

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 investigation aims to compare the functional performance of a new passive microprocessor-controlled Prosthetic Knee to subjects usual microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee.

Detailed description

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of the investigational device compared to other passive MPKs (Rheo Knee 4, C-leg 4, Genium, X3, Plié 3, Orion 3, Quattro, Allux) regarding satisfaction in descending activities for moderate to high active prosthesis users within the intended population for the investigational device. Additionally, to evaluate the balance confidence, perception of safety and comfort in standing with the investigational device compared to other passive MPKs (Rheo Knee 4, C-leg 4, Genium, X3, Plié 3, Orion 3, Quattro, Allux). In phase I the performance in descending activities will be compared to any other passive MPK and in phase II there will be a subgroup analysis comparing to hydraulic MPKs and Rheo Knee 3, specifically. The test will be a non-randomized single group open label prospective repeated measures (ABA) design. Amputees are a small proportion of the general population. The population group specified in the inclusion/exclusion criteria is a further subsample of amputees. For practical reasons, i.e. to achieve statistical power, it is therefore more feasible to use within-subject comparison rather than creating study arms to compare. Furthermore, as mobile amputees generally have and use a prosthetic device for their daily activities, within-comparison is feasible comparing to the subject's previous device. All investigational activities will be conducted at prosthetic out-patient clinics. As stated above the primary endpoint is Satisfaction on descending stairs, and the secondary endpoints are satisfaction on descending ramps, balance confidence and standing comfort in that respective order of significance. In addition, there are two exploratory endpoints on mobility and balance during ambulation. Procedures: i) Recruitment Potential subjects will be identified from the customer base of the Local Principal Investigator (LPI). LPI evaluates, based on previous experience of interaction with and servicing of patients, if a potential participant is cognitively capable. If a potential participant fits the inclusion and exclusion criteria the LPI will contact them via telephone. During the telephone call the LPI will verify if they are interested in participating in a study. If interest is expressed at this point they will answer some screening questions and if the eligibility criteria are met an appointment will be made for the clinical visit and signing of the ICF. Questions relating to the duration of the study, number of clinical visits required and the investigational device will be answered. Potential risk of participating in the investigation will be explained to the subject at this point to the candidate for enrolment. The LPI will communicate to the study monitor and sponsor co-investigator the number of users he has identified that meet the inclusion criteria and are willing to participate. ii) Test procedure There are three scheduled study events. Three sites will be included in the study, 4-10 users will be recruited at each site. At the initial visit, the first study event, for each subject a researcher qualified to obtain informed consent will seat the subject and proceed as described. Prior to fitting the subject will be asked to provide feedback on the current prosthesis, by filling in a set of questionnaires (Including background information) and perform functional tests. The users will be fitted within the standard methods of prosthetic fitting, alignment, introduction, training and walking on various terrain. After initial fitting, subjects will receive standard training on the investigational device by a certified prosthetist (the LPI) with support from sponsor investigators. When training is complete, and subjects feel comfortable and safe they will leave the site on the investigational device to use as their primary prosthesis in their daily life for 3 weeks. During this 3 week period the LPI will be in weekly contact with subjects via telephone to check on any issues that may arise. The second visit will be at three weeks after visit 1. During this visit subjects will complete the same functional tests and questionnaires as at visit 1 (excluding background information) on the investigational device, with the addition of a usability questionnaire. They will then be fitted back to their prescribed device. The third visit will be three weeks later. During this visit subjects will complete the same functional tests and questionnaires as at visit 2 (excluding usability questionnaire) on their prescribed device, as well as completing a qualitative interview on their experiences with both microprocessor knee devices. iii) Measurements and data collection The same questionnaires, consisting of three valid instruments (PEQ questions, PLUS-M and ABC), will be used and filled in at three separate points in time. Background information will be collected at baseline only, usability questionnaire at visit 2 only and qualitative interview at visit 3 only. An activity report will be generated from the investigational device at visit 2 and an activity report from subjects prescribed device at visit 3, if applicable.

Interventions

DEVICENAVii

Passive Microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee

Sponsors

Össur Iceland ehf
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Considering previous experience with clinical investigations in prosthetics it was concluded to conduct a non-randomized prospective repeated measures (ABA) design, comparing subjects' current MPK at baseline and 3-week follow-up vs. the investigational device at 3-week follow-up.

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

* 45Kg\< body weight \< 136Kg * Cognitive ability to understand all instructions and questionnaires in the study; * Unilateral TF/KD amputees that are regular prosthesis users for at least 3 months * Current MPK users (passive MPKs only) * Age ≥ 18 years * Willing and able to participate in the study and follow the protocol * Moderate to high active users (PLUS M T-score\>4021)

Exclusion criteria

* Users with stump pain * Users with socket problems * Pregnant Users * Users using Power Knee, Kenevo or mechanical knees as their prescribed prosthesis * Alignment that cannot be matched with the Rheo Knee 4 setup, as described in Instructions for use. * Osseointegration

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Satisfaction During Stair Descentfor analysis data from visit 2 (3 weeks after visit 1) and visit 3 (3 weeks after visit 2) were usedA question from the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) regarding the satisfaction of walking downstairs is answered; scale allows for values from 1 to 10 while 1 represents very low satisfaction and 10 high satisfaction. The analysis was done by using a Bayesian approach which presents the posterior distribution of effects between Visit 2 and visit 3. The parameter for analysis is the difference of the score between Visits 2 and 3. If scores in Visit 2 (subjects using the investigational device) were larger than in visit 3 (subjects using their prescribed device), the difference of Visit3 - Visit2 scores would be negative and would therefore support the corresponding hypotheses. The Median difference and range of the Confidence interval of the difference are reported in the outcome measure data table.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Six Minute Walk Testfor the final analysis data from visit 2 (3 weeks after visit 1) and visit 3 (3 weeks after visit 2) were usedThe Six Minute Walk test (6MWT) is a record of the distance traveled by a given patient at his or her self-selected walking speed over a period of six minutes. All that is required is a stopwatch and a walking corridor or track of known distance.

Countries

Iceland, United States

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORKurt N Gruben, CPO

Ossur Americas

Baseline characteristics

Characteristic
Age, Continuous46.4 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 16.8
PLUS-M T-Score55.3 T-score
STANDARD_DEVIATION 4.9
Region of Enrollment
Iceland
2 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
12 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
3 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
11 Participants
Socket Comfort Score9.1 scores on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.9

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 14
other
Total, other adverse events
1 / 14
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 14

Outcome results

None listed

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