BACKGROUND:Interfaces of transtibial prosthesis have an important role in the transmission of ground reaction forces, damping gait loads and tissue protection. OBJECTIVE:This work aims to study the influence of prosthesis interfaces on amputees’ gait and perception on pain, comfort and the overallinterface/prosthesis system. METHODS:Commercial samples of three different interface materials were selected: block copolymer (Material I), silicone gel (Material II) and silicone elastomer (Material III). Using standardized prosthesis, four amputee subjects performed gait tests at three imposed cadences in a barometric platform. The subjects also filled in a questionnaire about their perception. RESULTS:Material II presented the highest asymmetries of vertical ground reaction forces and was perceived as the most painful and uncomfortable. Material III led to the most symmetric load distribution between legs and was perceived as the most comfortable. Material I showed better overall biomechanical behavior and better subject’s perception. CONCLUSIONS:Material III showed appropriate characteristics for lower levels of activity for which it is recommended. Prescription of Material II should be rethought, as it is only adequate for specific and occasional situations. Material I should be considered adequate for both active and less active amputees. When correlating the subjects’ perception with the interface properties, we concluded that the mechanical properties are the most influential.

中文翻译：

---

假肢界面材料对胫骨截肢者步态影响的研究。

背景：胫骨假体的界面在地面反作用力的传递、步态载荷的阻尼和组织保护等方面具有重要作用。目的：本工作旨在研究假肢界面对截肢者步态和感知对疼痛、舒适度和整体界面/假肢系统的影响。方法：选取三种不同界面材料的商业样品：嵌段共聚物（材料I）、硅胶（材料II）和有机硅弹性体（材料III）。使用标准化的假肢，四名截肢者在气压平台上以三个强加的节奏进行步态测试。受试者还填写了一份关于他们看法的问卷。结果：材料 II 呈现出最大的垂直地面反作用力不对称性，被认为是最痛苦和最不舒服的。材料 III 导致双腿之间的负载分布最对称，被认为是最舒适的。材料 I 表现出更好的整体生物力学行为和更好的受试者感知。结论：材料 III 显示出适合其推荐用于较低活动水平的特性。应重新考虑材料 II 的规定，因为它仅适用于特定和偶尔的情况。材料 I 应该被认为适用于活跃和不太活跃的截肢者。当将受试者的感知与界面特性相关联时，我们得出结论，机械特性是最有影响的。材料 III 显示出适合推荐用于较低活动水平的特性。应重新考虑材料 II 的规定，因为它仅适用于特定和偶尔的情况。材料 I 应该被认为适用于活跃和不太活跃的截肢者。当将受试者的感知与界面特性相关联时，我们得出结论，机械特性是最有影响的。材料 III 显示出适合推荐用于较低活动水平的特性。应重新考虑材料 II 的规定，因为它仅适用于特定和偶尔的情况。材料 I 应该被认为适用于活跃和不太活跃的截肢者。当将受试者的感知与界面特性相关联时，我们得出结论，机械特性是最有影响的。