Skip to content

Comparison of Different Types of Prosthetic Foott

Comparison of Different Types of Prosthetic Foot: Patient Perspective

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05691998
Enrollment
20
Registered
2023-01-20
Start date
2023-01-25
Completion date
2023-04-01
Last updated
2023-01-20

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

Conditions

the Previous Prosthetic Foot Experience of Patients With Amputation

Brief summary

The main purpose of this study is to determine the experiences of patients with different types of prostetic feet (carbon, hydraulic or microprocessor controlled).

Detailed description

One of the main goals in the rehabilitation of amputees is to provide optimal and natural ambulation. For this purpose, suitable socket-suspension type, appropriate knee joint and foot should be prescribed. In the selection of feet, the age, occupation, characteristics of the geographical region, mental status and activity level should be considered. In addition, the previous prosthesis experience of the people should definitely be taken into account during prosthesis prescribing.The main purpose of this study is to determine the experiences of patients with different types of prostetic feet (carbon, hydraulic or microprocessor controlled).

Interventions

OTHERProsthetic foot questionnaire

Prosthetic foot related questions will be asked to the patients

Sponsors

Gaziler Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Education and Research Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
CASE_ONLY
Time perspective
CROSS_SECTIONAL

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Aged between 18-65 years * Lower limb amputation * Having used at least 2 different foot types (carbon, hydrolic, microprocessor-controlled)

Exclusion criteria

* Having used the single type of foot until now * Presence of neurological, cardiovascular, and pulmonary disease that may affect walking performance

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Qestion 1through study completion, an average of one and a half monthsWalking on the straight road
Qestion 2through study completion, an average of one and a half monthsWalking on uneven terrain

Contacts

Primary ContactYasin Demir, Associated Professor
dr_yasindemir@yahoo.com+903122911806

Outcome results

None listed

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