Comparative biomechanical analysis of energy-storing prosthetic feet

Gait analysis was performed on eight men who had unilateral traumatic below-knee amputation and on nine control subjects. Each subject was given two prostheses--the Seattle Foot and the Flex Foot--which differed only in the energy-storing foot component. Analysis of subjects consisted of clinical gait observation, forceplate analysis of the ground reaction force (GRF) while using each prosthesis during level walking at the natural cadence, and evaluation of subject preference between the two prosthetic feet. In the control subjects, there was no significant asymmetry in any averaged GRF patterns or parameters. In the subjects with amputations, the amputated limb had a weaker propulsion and the nonamputated limb had a stronger propulsion than controls. This was true for both prostheses. During ambulation with the Flex Foot, there was a pattern of larger late vertical forces but smaller late anteroposterior and mediolateral forces. This is consistent with a medial heel whip, and it was observed when the Flex Foot was used. Three months after the biomechanical studies, four subjects used the Flex Foot exclusively, two used the Seattle Foot exclusively, and two used both, ie, the Flex Foot for sports and the Seattle Foot for work. Application of these results to the choice of prosthetic components is discussed.