Maintaining stable transtibial amputee gait on level and simulated uneven conditions in a virtual environment

This research compares gait strategies to maintain stable gait over a variety of non-level walking conditions for individuals with a transtibial amputation and able-bodied individuals.

Twelve people with unilateral transtibial amputation and twelve able-bodied individuals walked on a self-paced treadmill in a park-like virtual environment with level and continuous perturbation conditions. Walking stability was quantified by margin-of-stability, step parameters (walking speed, temporal and spatial parameters, and foot clearance), and gait variability (standard deviations for margin-of-stability, step parameters, and root-mean-square of trunk acceleration).

For non-level conditions, able-bodied and transtibial groups had greater root-mean-square of trunk acceleration and walked with a cautious and variable step strategy by changing speed, step width, foot clearance, margin-of-stability, and increasing step variability. Overall, able-bodied and transtibial amputee participants adopted similar strategies to maintain stable gait over non-level conditions, but the amputee group was more variable than the able-bodied group. These results demonstrated the importance of measuring gait variability, including trunk acceleration and step variability measures, when quantitatively assessing mobility for individuals with a transtibial amputation. Implications for rehabilitation Able-bodied and transtibial amputee groups adapted gait biomechanics for simulated uneven conditions. Adaptations for non-level conditions included increasing step width, margin-of stability, minimum foot clearance, and varying speed. Gait was also more variable for non-level conditions, with greater variability for transtibial amputee participants compared to able-bodied participants. These results highlight the importance of measuring variability when performing comprehensive walking assessment, particularly for active individuals who achieve maximal performance on standard assessments yet report functional limitations in daily living.