背景:残肢不适和损伤是下肢截肢患者的常见经历。经常,假肢装置和残肢之间的负载分配不足是这个问题的根本原因。为了提高我们对假肢接口配合的理解,需要工具来评估假肢界面处的机械相互作用,允许评估和优化界面设计。
目的:介绍旨在促进理解假肢界面和残肢之间的机械相互作用的方法报告。作为一项试点研究,该方法用于使用次级磁共振成像(MRI)数据比较单个经胫骨假体使用者的动手界面和动手界面。
方法:将佩戴假肢界面时残肢的MRI数据分割为硬组织和皮肤表面模型。这些模型将导出为立体光刻(STL)文件。两种方法用于分析界面设计。首先,CloudCompare软件用于为两种接口类型的已编译内部骨表面上的每个顶点计算皮肤表面上最近的顶点。其次,CloudCompare软件用于在佩戴手和手分离界面时比较残肢的记录皮肤表面。
结果:内部骨表面和皮肤表面之间的最大和最小最近距离在界面类型之间相似。然而,最近距离的分布不同。在佩戴两个界面时比较皮肤表面时,其中拟合更压缩可以可视化。对于本研究中使用的数据集,可以识别动手髌骨肌腱轴承接口和动手压力铸造接口的经典特征。
结论:本报告中提出的方法可能为研究人员提供进一步的工具,以更好地了解界面设计如何影响残肢的软组织。
BACKGROUND: Residual limb discomfort and injury is a common experience for people living with lower limb amputation. Frequently, inadequate load distribution between the prosthetic device and the residual limb is the root cause of this issue. To advance our understanding of prosthetic interface fit, tools are needed to evaluate the mechanical interaction at the prosthetic interface, allowing interface designs to be evaluated and optimised.
OBJECTIVE: Present a methodology report designed to facilitate comprehension of the mechanical interaction between the prosthetic interface and the residual limb. As a pilot study, this methodology is used to compare a hands-on and hands-off interface for a single transtibial prosthesis user using secondary Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data.
METHODS: MRI data of the residual limb while wearing a prosthetic interface is segmented into a hard tissue and a skin surface model. These models are exported as stereolithography (STL) files. Two methods are used to analyse the interface designs. Firstly, CloudCompare software is used to compute the nearest vertex on the skin surface for every vertex on the compiled internal bony surface for both interface types. Secondly, CloudCompare software is used to compare registered skin surfaces of the residual limb while wearing the hands-on and hands-off interfaces.
RESULTS: The maximum and minimum nearest distances between the internal bony surface and skin surface were similar between interface types. However, the distribution of nearest distances was different. When comparing the skin surface while wearing both interfaces, where the fit is more compressive can be visualized. For the dataset used in this study, the classic features of a hands-on Patella Tendon Bearing interface and hands-off pressure cast interface could be identified.
CONCLUSIONS: The methodology presented in this report may give researchers a further tool to better understand how interface designs affect the soft tissues of the residual limb.