Open AccessArticle10.3109/03093649209164341

Weight distribution of below-knee amputee and able-bodied children during standing

10PDF

TL;DRAbstract

The purpose of this investigation was to compare weight distributions of a relatively large number of below-knee (BK) amputee and able-bodied children during two different standing positions. Twenty-one BK amputees and 200 able-bodied children volunteered as subjects for this investigation. Each child stood on a pressure plate and three sets of trial data were collected. One set of trial data was collected with both feet together on the pressure plate and two were collected with feet placed 20cm apart. The total force applied by each foot to the pressure plate was normalised by dividing by subject weight to yield foot force to body weight ratios. Data were separated into forefoot and rearfoot areas, force for the forefoot area was then calculated and normalised by dividing by total foot force to yield forefoot to whole-foot force ratios. Ratios for the two foot placement conditions and for non-prosthetic, prosthetic, dominant, and non-dominant feet were compared using paired t-tests (p

Chat with Paper

AI Agents for this Paper

The purpose of this investigation was to compare weight distributions of a relatively large number of below-knee (BK) amputee and able-bodied children during two different standing positions. Twenty-one BK amputees and 200 able-bodied children volunteered as subjects for this investigation. Each child stood on a pressure plate and three sets of trial data were collected. One set of trial data was collected with both feet together on the pressure plate and two were collected with feet placed 20cm apart. The total force applied by each foot to the pressure plate was normalised by dividing by subject weight to yield foot force to body weight ratios. Data were separated into forefoot and rearfoot areas, force for the forefoot area was then calculated and normalised by dividing by total foot force to yield forefoot to whole-foot force ratios. Ratios for the two foot placement conditions and for non-prosthetic, prosthetic, dominant, and non-dominant feet were compared using paired t-tests (p

Chat

Click to start Chat