An adaptive prosthetic socket for people with transtibial amputation

• Published in: Scientific reports Vol. 14; no. 1; pp. 11168 - 15
• Main Authors: Sanders, Joan E., Vamos, Andrew C., Mertens, Joseph C., Allyn, Katheryn J., Larsen, Brian G., Ballesteros, Daniel, Wang, Horace, DeGrasse, Nicholas S., Garbini, Joseph L., Hafner, Brian J., Friedly, Janna L.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London Nature Publishing Group UK 15.05.2024; Nature Publishing Group; Nature Portfolio
• Subjects: 692/308/575; 692/53/2421; Adaptive prosthesis; Adult; Aged; Amputation; Amputation, Surgical; Amputee comfort; Amputees - rehabilitation; Artificial Limbs; Auto-adjusting socket; Closed-loop control; Elastomers; Female; Functional outcome; Humanities and Social Sciences; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; multidisciplinary; Prostheses; Prosthesis Design; Prosthesis Fitting - methods; Quality of Life; Science; Science (multidisciplinary); Socket fit; Tibia - surgery; Walking; Auto-adjusting socket; Socket fit; Adaptive prosthesis; Amputee comfort; Closed-loop control; Functional outcome
• ISSN: 2045-2322; 2045-2322
• DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-61234-9

It is essential that people with limb amputation maintain proper prosthetic socket fit to prevent injury. Monitoring and adjusting socket fit, for example by removing the prosthesis to add prosthetic socks, is burdensome and can adversely affect users’ function and quality-of-life. This study presents results from take-home testing of a motor-driven adaptive socket that automatically adjusted socket size during walking. A socket fit metric was calculated from inductive sensor measurements of the distance between the elastomeric liner surrounding the residual limb and the socket’s inner surface. A proportional-integral controller was implemented to adjust socket size. When tested on 12 participants with transtibial amputation, the controller was active a mean of 68% of the walking time. In general, participants who walked more than 20 min/day demonstrated greater activity, less doff time, and fewer manual socket size adjustments for the adaptive socket compared with a locked non-adjustable socket and a motor-driven socket that participants adjusted with a smartphone application. Nine of 12 participants reported that they would use a motor-driven adjustable socket if it were available as it would limit their socket fit issues. The size and weight of the adaptive socket were considered the most important variables to improve.