Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
recruitment rate of patients was not sufficient during COVID-19; problems with the quality of the primary outcome data collected
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Saphenus Medical Technology GmbH | INDUSTRY |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Prosthetics research has grown recently, focusing on bionic approaches that restore bodily functions with technical aids. One method involves using prostheses with feedback systems, which measure physical parameters and provide additional information to the user. Saphenus has developed a feedback system called Suralis© that transfers pressure signals from the prosthetic sole to another body region. This clinical investigation aimed to determine if this system improves gait stability and walking. The study analyzed changes in gait and functional balance and gathered patient-reported measures to evaluate the quality of life.
This research was open to individuals who have undergone below-knee amputation but no targeted re-innervation surgery and use prosthetics. Participants received the Suralis© feedback system, and the investigators assessed their walking activities. The system measures prosthetic foot sole pressure and converts it into digital signals, triggering vibration stimuli during the stance phase of walking. The investigators collected gait analyses and patient feedback to assess the impact of the feedback system on prosthetic management. The results will help us understand the benefits and effectiveness of this technology for people with amputation.
The investigators conducted a prospective, unblinded crossover trial to compare the effectiveness of a vibration intervention with no intervention. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two sequences: vibration intervention followed by no intervention or vice versa. The intervention involved using the Suralis© vibrotactile ground-contact feedback system for 60 days. The system transmitted ground contact information to the residual lateral thigh, providing sensory feedback. During the control phase, participants received no additional intervention. The washout period lasted seven days. The study collected data during four visits, assessing gait and patient-reported measures. Bayesian generalized linear mixed models were used for data analysis, considering fixed effects (intervention, sequence, and period) and random effects (individuality).
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control-Vibration | Active Comparator | Participants were assessed before and after 60 days of no additional intervention to any ongoing treatment, after seven days of washout, and after receiving 60 days of vibrotactile ground-contact feedback. |
|
| Vibration-Control | Active Comparator | Participants were assessed before and after receiving 60 days of vibrotactile ground-contact feedback, after seven days of washout, and after 60 days of no additional intervention to any ongoing treatment. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| vibrotactile ground-contact feedback | Device | Suralis®, Saphenus Medical Technology (Baden, Lower Austria, Austria) |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Affected leg stance time treatment-change difference | Stance time of the prosthetic leg during walking over level ground and on a 518 cm instrumented walkway at a self-selected speed | Difference between the within-period changes of the 60-day control (C) and vibration (V) periods of the randomized controlled crossover trial, i.e., V(post - pre) - C(post - pre); three tries each assessment day |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Gait speed treatment-change difference | Average speed of walking over level ground and on a 518 cm instrumented walkway at a self-selected speed | Difference between the within-period changes of the 60-day control (C) and vibration (V) periods of the randomized controlled crossover trial, i.e., V(post - pre) - C(post - pre); three tries each assessment day |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Gerfried Peternell, MD | Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Traumatology, The Research Center in Cooperation with the AUVA | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ordination Dr. Wolfgang Schaden | Vienna | 1030 | Austria |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40054381 | Derived | Penasso H, Peternell G, Schultheis R, Pitschl A, Leskovar R, Gardetto A, Ernst J, Schmid-Zalaudek K, Schaden W. Safety and efficacy of vibrotactile feedback for adults with transtibial amputation: A randomized controlled cross-over trial. Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2025 Apr;124:106443. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2025.106443. Epub 2025 Feb 10. |
Not provided
Not provided
All individual participant data that underlie results in the main publication
At the time of acceptance in a scientific journal
The investigators aim to provide broad, equitable, and maximally open access to the dataset and their metadata free of charge in a timely manner after acceptance, consistent with legal and ethical limits required to maintain privacy and confidentiality, tribal sovereignty, and protection of other sensitive data.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Unaffected leg step length treatment-change difference | Step length of the non-prosthetic leg during walking over level ground and on a 518 cm instrumented walkway at a self-selected speed | Difference between the within-period changes of the 60-day control (C) and vibration (V) periods of the randomized controlled crossover trial, i.e., V(post - pre) - C(post - pre); three tries each assessment day |
| Quality of life score treatment-change difference | EuroQol (EQ) 5-Dimension (5D) 3-Level (3L) version, visual analog scale (VAS) | Difference between the within-period changes of the 60-day control (C) and vibration (V) periods of the randomized controlled crossover trial, i.e., V(post - pre) - C(post - pre); once each assessment day |
| Adverse effects frequency treatment difference | Patient diary documentation and interview regarding adverse effects | Difference in the event frequency during the 60-day control (C) and vibration (V) periods of the randomized controlled crossover trial, i.e., V - C; once each assessment day |
| Timed up and go test time treatment-change difference | Stand up, walk 3 m, turn around, and sit down | Difference between the within-period changes of the 60-day control (C) and vibration (V) periods of the randomized controlled crossover trial, i.e., V(post - pre) - C(post - pre); three tries each assessment day |
| 2 min walk test distance treatment-change difference | Walking distance in meters within a 2 min time frame | Difference between the within-period changes of the 60-day control (C) and vibration (V) periods of the randomized controlled crossover trial, i.e., V(post - pre) - C(post - pre); once each assessment day |
| Four square step test time treatment-change difference | Do and reverse four steps over 90 cm long canes arranged in a cross configuration on the ground | Difference between the within-period changes of the 60-day control (C) and vibration (V) periods of the randomized controlled crossover trial, i.e., V(post - pre) - C(post - pre); three tries each assessment day |