Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 25, 2025
Oscillation and Reaction Board Techniques for Estimating Inertial Properties of a Below-knee Prosthesis
Published on: May 8, 2014
The significance of frontal plane static alignment in anticipating dynamic knee moment among transtibial prosthesis
Niels Jonkergouw1, Astrid T Sprockel2, Sjoerd M Bruijn3
1Military Rehabilitation Center Aardenburg, Doorn, the Netherlands; Department of Human Movement Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Background:
In the process of transtibial prosthetic fitting, alignment is the process of positioning the prosthetic foot relative to the residual limb. Changes in frontal plane alignment can impact knee moments during walking, which can either cause or, when aligned properly, prevent injuries. However, clinical evaluation of dynamic knee moments is challenging, limiting prosthetists' insights into dynamic joint loading. Typically, knee joint loading is assessed in static stance using the knee moment arm as a proxy for subsequent dynamic alignment. It remains uncertain if static alignment accurately represents actual dynamics during walking.
Research Question:
Is the frontal knee moment arm in stance predictive for the knee moment arm and external knee adduction moment during gait in transtibial bone-anchored prosthesis users?
Methods:
In this cross-sectional study, twenty-seven unilateral transtibial bone-anchored prosthesis users underwent data acquisition on the M-Gait instrumented treadmill. Static and dynamic measurements were conducted, and knee moment arm and external knee adduction moment were calculated. Pearson's correlation and linear regression analyses were performed to examine relationships between static and dynamic knee moment arms and external knee adduction moments.
Results:
The static knee moment arm showed significant associations with dynamic knee moment arm at the ground reaction force peaks (First: r=0.60, r2=35%, p<0.001; Second: r=0.62, r2=38%, p=0.001) and knee adduction moment (First: r=0.42, r2=17%, p=0.030; Second: r=0.59, r2=35%, p=0.001). A 1 mm between-subject difference in static knee moment arm corresponded, on average, with a 0.9% difference in knee adduction moment at the first peak and a 1.5% difference at the second peak of the ground reaction force.
Significance:
While static alignment is important to optimize adduction moments during stance it may only partly mitigate excessive moments during gait. The fair correlation and limited percentage of explained variance underscores the importance of dynamic alignment in optimizing the body's dynamic load during walking.
