Table 3 Assistive PAFOs tested on impaired and elderly subjects
Ref. | Actuation (Pf/Df) | Control | Weight PAFO | Subjects | Conditions (n. sessions / repetitions) | Walking speed | Ul / Bl | Portable | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Awad, 2017 [63] | SEA (Pf + Df) | P-Bc: Pf assist during stance, Df assist during swing | 0.9 kg | 8 Str | 8P-8U | Self-selected | Ul | no | ↓ hip hiking ↓ circumduction ↑ step length ↑ Df in swing |
Awad, 2017 [64] | SEA (Pf + Df) | P-Bc: Pf assist during stance, Df assist during swing | 0.9 kg | 9 Str | 8P-8U (2sess, 2 different onset timings) | Self-selected | Ul | no | ↑ Df in swing ↓ propulsion asymmetry ↓ metabolic cost |
4.1 kg | P-U | yes | ↑ Df in swing ↓ propulsion asymmetry | ||||||
Bae, 2015 [26] | SEA (Pf* + Df) | P-Bc: Pf assist during PO, Df assist during swing | 0.9 kg | 3 Str | baseline: N; training: P (3 to 5 sess); test: P | Self-selected | Ul | no | ↑ step and stance time symmetry ↑ propulsion symmetry ↓ circumduction |
Bae, 2018 [27] | SEA (Pf* + Df) | P-Bc: Pf assist during stance, Df assist during swing | 0.9 kg | 7 Str | 8P-8U | Self-selected | Ul | no | ↑ symmetry body CoM power generation ↓ metabolic cost ↑ symmetry ankle power generation |
Blaya, 2004 [51] | SEA (Df) | P-Bc: Df assist during LR and swing | 2.6 kg | 3 H | N-A-P | Self-selected (1.21m/s (H), 1.15m/s (Dfi)), slow, fast (decreased, increased 25%) | / | no | / |
2 Dfi | ↑ Df in swing; ↑ Pf in stance; ↓ occurrence of foot slap at all speeds; ↓ step length and step time asymmetry at slow and self-selected speed | ||||||||
Galle, 2017 [56] | PAM (Pf) | P-Bc: Pf assist during PO | 0.76 kg | 8 E | 5N-5U-5P(x2 powered conditions) (2 sess) | 1.11 m/s | Bl | no | ↑ step length ↓ metabolic cost |
Norris, 2007 [55] | PAM (Pf) | P-Bc: Pf assist during PO | 0.8 kg | 9 H | N-U-P | Self-selected | Bl | no | ↑ walking speed; modest reduction metabolic cost |
7 E | no difference in walking speed; modest reduction metabolic cost | ||||||||
Sawicki, 2006 [65] | PAM (Pf) + elastic cord (Df) | P-btnc: PO assist | 1.09 kg | 5 iSCI | 10/15N-10/15U-10/15P(therapist)-10/15P(patient), 30/50% BWS (2 sess) | 0.36, 0.54, 0.72, 0.89 m/s (subjects preferred: 0.56 m/s) | Bl | no | ↑ RoM; ↑ Pf in stance; bigger improvements in therapist than patients control; in P muscle activity similar to N |
Shorter, 2011 [52] | BPnA (Pf + Df) | P-Bc: Df assist during LR and swing, Pf assist during PO | 3.1 kg | 3 H | 1N-1U-1P(x3 powered conditions) | Self-selected | Ul | yes | ↓ tibialis anterior activity |
1 Pfi | 1.5N-1.5U-1.5P(x3 powered conditions) | Ul + AFO | improved Pf; improved PO phase | ||||||
Shorter, 2011 [53] | BPnA (Pf + Df) | P-Bc: Pf assist during PO | 3.1 kg | 1 Pfi | N-U-P | Self-selected | Ul + AFO | yes | ↓ RoM in Df; ↓ symmetry; improved PO phase |
P-Bc: Df assist during LR and swing | 1 Dfi | ↓ occurrence foot drop; better foot positioning heel strike; ↓ symmetry | |||||||
Takahashi, 2015 [39] | PAM (Pf) | PMc (impaired soleus & GRF) | / | 5 Str | 5N-5U-5P (x3 powered conditions) | 75% of self-selected | Ul | no | ↓ impaired soleus activation; trend of decreasing metabolic cost |
Yeung, 2017 [54] | StA (Pf + Df) | P-Bc: Pf assist during LR and PO, Df assist during swing | 1 kg | 3 Str | training: 10U; test: N-U-P | / | / | yes | ↓ occurrence foot drop; no enhancement PO |