Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 14, 2026
Oscillation and Reaction Board Techniques for Estimating Inertial Properties of a Below-knee Prosthesis
Published on: May 8, 2014
The development of rating scales to evaluate experiential prosthetic foot preference for people with lower limb
Talia R Ruxin1, Elizabeth G Halsne1,2, Brian J Hafner2
1VA RR&D Center for Limb Loss and Mobility (CLiMB), VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Background:
Selection of a foot is an important aspect of prosthetic prescription and vital to maximizing mobility and functional goals after lower limb amputation. Development of a standardized approach to soliciting user experiential preferences is needed to improve evaluation and comparison of prosthetic feet.
Objective:
To develop rating scales to assess prosthetic foot preference and to evaluate use of these scales in people with transtibial amputation after trialing different prosthetic feet.
Design:
Participant-blinded, repeated measures crossover trial.
Setting:
Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense Medical Centers, laboratory setting.
Participants:
Seventy-two male prosthesis users with unilateral transtibial amputation started, and 68 participants completed this study.
Interventions:
Participants trialed three mobility-level appropriate commercial prosthetic feet briefly in the laboratory.
Main Outcome Measures:
"Activity-specific" rating scales were developed to assess participants' ability with a given prosthetic foot to perform typical mobility activities (eg, walking at different speeds, on inclines, and stairs) and "global" scales to rate overall perceived energy required to walk, satisfaction, and willingness to regularly use the prosthetic foot. Foot preference was determined by comparing the rating scale scores, after laboratory testing.
Results:
The greatest within-participant differences in scores among feet were observed in the "incline" activity, where 57% ± 6% of participants reported 2+ point differences. There was a significant association (p < .05) between all "activity-specific" rating scores (except standing) and each "global" rating score.
Conclusions:
The standardized rating scales developed in this study could be used to assess prosthetic foot preference in both the research and clinical settings to guide prosthetic foot prescription for people with lower limb amputation capable of a range of mobility levels.
