1 / 5

Joan E. Sanders, PhD;* Daniel S. Harrison, BS; Timothy R. Myers, MME; Katheryn J. Allyn, LCPO

Effects of elevated vacuum on in-socket residual limb fluid volume: Case study results using bioimpedance analysis. Joan E. Sanders, PhD;* Daniel S. Harrison, BS; Timothy R. Myers, MME; Katheryn J. Allyn, LCPO. Study Aim

carolrichards
Download Presentation

Joan E. Sanders, PhD;* Daniel S. Harrison, BS; Timothy R. Myers, MME; Katheryn J. Allyn, LCPO

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Effects of elevated vacuum on in-socket residual limb fluid volume: Case study results using bioimpedance analysis Joan E. Sanders, PhD;* Daniel S. Harrison, BS; Timothy R. Myers, MME; Katheryn J. Allyn, LCPO

  2. Study Aim • Measure extracellular fluid volume changes of subjects with transtibial amputation walking with elevated vacuum sockets, suction sockets, or sockets with lock-and-pin suspension. • Relevance • Daily and long-term volume changes can affect fit of the prosthetic socket, potentially causing pain and increasing risk of injury.

  3. Methods • Residual limb extracellular fluid volume was measured with bioimpedance analysis while 7 subjects with unilateral transtibial amputation sat, stood, and walked. Low current was applied between two outer pair electrodes on residual limb while voltage was measured between two inner pair electrodes.

  4. Results • Fluid volume losses during 3 or 5 min walks and losses over 30 min test session were generally less for elevated vacuum than for suction. • However, results do not consistently demonstrate that elevated vacuum maintained or increased limb fluid volume, or that elevated vacuum had no effect. • Variables, including data collection time, soft tissue consistency, socket-to-limb size and shape differences, and health, may have affected results and had ≥ effect on limb fluid volume vs elevated vacuum.

  5. Conclusions • Some measures of limb fluid volume changed consistently, while others did not. • Many variables affect limb fluid volume change and researchers must incorporate these variables into future study designs, particularly when comparing elevated vacuum to another socket design.

More Related