Bryana Slough
Pronouns: she/her
Research Mentor(s): Deanna Gates
Research Mentor School/College/Department: Movement Science / Kinesiology
Program: UROP
Session: Session 3 (11:00am – 11:50am)
Authors: Bryana Slough, Deanna Gates
Abstract
Background: The largest concerns for people with lower-limb loss are comfort and fit of their prosthetic socket on the residual limb. Improper socket fit produces pain, sores, blisters, and decreases mobility. These symptoms are common as a user’s residual limb changes size and shape throughout the day, while their socket does not. Because of this, there are new adjustable sockets on the market claiming to improve comfort, fit, mobility, and endurance as the socket changes shape with the user. However, there is not much research on adjustable sockets and larger trials to better understand patient outcomes are needed. Purpose: The objective of this study was to determine the potential benefits of three styles of adjustable prosthetic sockets to inform clinical decision making. Methods: This randomized crossover study compared three styles of adjustable sockets to a conventional, laminated socket. After four weeks of accommodation, we tested socket comfort, satisfaction, mobility, movement confidence, and daily activity levels through surveys and gait tests like the 2-minute walk, TUG test, and L test. Results: Although testing is ongoing, there have been 25 participants enrolled in the study. Seven of these participants completed testing in all the sockets including the laminated and the three adjustable sockets. Nine participants dropped out of the study. 100% (23/23) of participants who were fit with a laminated socket successfully completed testing while 53% (9/17), 69% (11/16) and 91% (10/11) of participants were able to wear the CJ Sail, LiM, and Quatro sockets for testing, respectfully. All sockets that participants were able to wear for a full trial were deemed comfortable with an average socket comfort score of 7/10. Because results are still preliminary, there are no clear trends in terms of participant comfort or mobility. Of the seven participants who completed testing, three chose to remain in the socket they started with (2 laminated, 1 CJ Sail) and the remaining four chose to switch from laminated to Quatro (1) or CJ Sail (3). Discussion / Conclusion: These preliminary findings suggest that there is a lower success rate in adjustable prosthetic sockets than a standard laminated prosthetic socket. Future testing will determine if there are any trends in participant comfort and mobility as well as give us more insight into which socket is preferred. Our results will be important to enhance clinician and user understanding of potential benefits of adjustable sockets, address research gaps, reduce financial burden, and reduce doctor visits.
