Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Functional walking ability of paraplegic patients: comparison of functional electrical stimulation versus mechanical orthoses

  • General Review
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Spinal cord injury (SCI) can cause partial or complete paralysis of the lower extremities, impairing the ability of individuals to stand and walk. Various types of mechanical orthoses, functional electrical stimulation (FES) systems and hybrid orthoses that incorporate FES have been designed to restore the ability of individuals with SCI to stand and walk. Standing and ambulation performance of SCI subjects using these different systems have been previously evaluated using energy consumption analysis, stability analysis and by quantitative gait analysis. Though FES-based systems are technologically more complex than passive mechanical systems, it is not apparent whether user performance is substantially improved with FES and hybrid orthoses compared to purely mechanical orthoses.

Method

An electronic search was performed via the Pubmed, Embase and ISI Web of Knowledge data base from 1960 to 2010. The abstracts, titles and full details of each individual study were assessed by the authors. The findings that were indicative of users’ performance with the FES systems and hybrid systems were compared with that of mechanical orthoses. Moreover, the effects of using these different systems on physiological health were evaluated.

Results

Twelve original articles and 5 review articles were selected by the author. However, most of the original articles were case studies. The results of previous investigations indicate that user performance with the mechanical orthoses was generally better than that of the hybrid and FES systems based on subject’s stability and energy consumption while walking. Moreover, subject reportedly experienced a higher incidence of problems with the use of hybrid orthoses and FES systems compared with mechanical orthoses.

Conclusion

FES and hybrid orthoses offer considerable potential for restoring standing and walking abilities in persons with SCI. However, improvements in their designs and operation with subsequent objective evaluations are required to demonstrate that these systems enable users to improve their performance over that currently possible with passive, mechanical orthoses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hammell KW (1995) Spinal cord injury rehabilitation, vol 3. Therapy in practice 45. Chapman & Hall, London

    Google Scholar 

  2. Liverman CT (2005) Spinal cord injury: progress, promise, and priorities, vol 1. National Academies, Oxford Oxford Publicity Partnership [distributor], Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rose GK (1986) Orthotics: principles and practice. Heinemann, London

    Google Scholar 

  4. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (1985) Atlas of orthotics, vol 10. 2nd edn. St. Louis, Mosby, pp 199–237

  5. Douglas R, Larson PF, D’ Ambrosia R, McCall RE (1983) The LSU reciprocal-gait orthosis. Orthopedics 6:834–839

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kralj AR, Bajd T (1989) Functional electrical stimulation: standing and walking after spinal cord injury. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ferrarin M, Pedotti A (1994) Restoration of walking for paraplegics: recent advancements and trends. IOS Press, Milano (Edizioni Pro Juventute, Oxford)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Karimi MT, Spence W, Sandy A, Solomonidis S (2010) Can the performance of the paraplegic subjects be improved: orthopaedic technique 5:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ferguson KA, Polando G, Kobetic R, Triolo RJ, Marsolais EB (1999) Walking with a hybrid orthosis system. Spinal Cord 37:800–804

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Thoumie P, Le Claire G, Beillot J, Dassonville J, Chevalier T, Perrouin-Verbe B, Bedoiseau M, Busnel M, Cormerais A, Courtillon A et al (1995) Restoration of functional gait in paraplegic patients with the RGO-II hybrid orthosis. A multicenter controlled study. II: physiological evaluation. Paraplegia 33:654–659

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Baardman G, IJzerman MJ, Hermens HJ, Veltink PH, Boom HBK, Zilvold G (2002) Augmentation of the knee flexion during the swing phase of orthotic gait in paraplegia by means of functional electrical stimulation. Saudi J Disabil Rehabil 8(2):73–81

    Google Scholar 

  12. Baardman G, Ijzerman MJ, Hermens HJ, Veltink PH, Boom G, Zilvold G (2002) Knee flexion during the swing phase of orthotic gait: influence on kinematics, kinetics and energy consumption in two paraplegic cases. Saudi J Disabil Rehabil 8:20–32

    Google Scholar 

  13. Solomonow M, Baratta R, Hirokawa S, Rightor N, Walker W, Beaudette P, Shoji H, D’Ambrosia R (1989) The RGO generation II: muscle stimulation powered orthosis as a practical walking system for thoracic paraplegics. Orthopedics 12:1309–1315

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Minato T, Shimada Y, Sato K, Matsunaga T, Tsutsumi Y, Misawa A et al (1999) Standing stability of the medial linkage KAFOs using functional electrical stimulation in complete paraplegia. Paraplegia 14:13–21

    Google Scholar 

  15. Nene AV, Patrick JH (1990) Energy cost of paraplegic locomotion using the Parawalker electrical stimulation “hybrid” orthosis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 71:116–120

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Stallard J, Major RE, Poiner R, Farmer IR, Jones N (1986) Engineering design considerations of the ORLAU Parawalker and FES hybrid system. Eng Med 15:123–129

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Stallard J, Major RE (1995) The influence of orthosis stiffness on paraplegic ambulation and its implications for functional electrical stimulation (FES) walking systems. Prosthet Orthot Int 19:108–114

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Stallard J, Major RE (1993) The case for lateral stiffness in walking orthoses for paraplegic patients. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 207:1–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Andrews BJ (1990) A modular hybrid FES orthosis for paraplegics. Paper presented at the annual international conference of the IEEE engineering in medicine and biology society

  20. Gharooni S, Heller B, Tokhi MO (2001) A new hybrid spring brake orthosis for controlling hip and knee flexion in the swing phase. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 9:106–107

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Greene PJ (2002) Design and evaluation of a knee and ankle flexing hybrid orthosis for paraplegic ambulation. University of Strathclyde, Glasgow

    Google Scholar 

  22. Greene PJ, Granat MH (2003) A knee and ankle flexing hybrid orthosis for paraplegic ambulation. Med Eng Phys 25:539–565

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dall PM (2004) The function of orthotic hip and knee joints during gait for individuals with thoracic level spinal cord injury, Thesis (Ph.D.). University of Strathclyde, Glasgow

  24. Winchester PK, Carollo JJ, Parekh RN, Lutz LM, Aston JW (1994) Physiological cost of reciprocating gait performance in FES assisted walking. Paraplegia 32:680–686

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Kobetic R, To CS, Schnellenberger JR, Audu ML, Bulea TC, Gaudio R, Pinault G, Tashman S, Triolo RJ (2009) Development of hybrid orthosis for standing, walking, and stair climbing after spinal cord injury. J Rehabil Res Dev 46:447–462

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Goldfarb M, Korkowski K, Harrold B, Durfee W (2003) Preliminary evaluation of a controlled-brake orthosis for FES-aided gait. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 11:241–248

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Goldfarb M, Durfee WK (1996) Design of a controlled-brake orthosis for FES-aided gait. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 4:13–24

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Jailani R, Tokhi MO, Gharooni S (2010) Hybrid orthosis: the technology for spinal cord injury. J Appl Sci 10:2785–2792

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Phillips CA, Hendershot DM (1991) Functional electrical stimulation and reciprocating gait orthosis for ambulation exercise in a tetraplegic patient: a case study. Paraplegia 29:268–276

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Sykes L, Campbell IG, Powell ES, Ross ER, Edwards J (1996) Energy expenditure of walking for adult patients with spinal cord lesions using the reciprocating gait orthosis and functional electrical stimulation. Spinal Cord 34:659–665

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Isakov E, Douglas R, Berns P (1992) Ambulation using the reciprocating gait orthosis and functional electrical stimulation. Paraplegia 30:239–245

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Rose J, Gamble JG (2006) Human walking, 3rd edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rose J, Gamble JG, Inman VT (1994) Human walking, 2nd edn. Williams & Wilkins, London

  34. Audu M, To CS, Kobetic R, Triolo RJ (2010) Gait evaluation of a novel hip constraint orthosis with implication for walking in paraplegia. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 118:610–618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Shirley W, Darren ERW (2008) Hybrid exercise rehabilitation in persons with spinal cord injuries: a brief review health and fitness. J Can 1:30–35

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kagaya H, Shimada Y, Sato K, Sato M, Iizuka K, IObinata G (1996) An electrical knee lock system for functional electrical stimulation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 77:870–873

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Yang L, Condie DN, Granat MH, Paul JP, Rowley DI (1996) Effects of joint motion constraints on the gait of normal subjects and their implications on the further development of hybrid FES orthosis for paraplegic persons. J Biomech 29(2):217–226

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ijzerman MJ, Baardman G, Holweg GGJ, Hermens HJ, Veltink PH, Boom HBK, Zilvold Z (1997) The influence of frontal alignment in the advanced reciprocating gait orthosis on energy cost and crutch force requirements during paraplegic gait. Basic Appl Myol 7:123–130

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rose GK (1979) The principles and practice of hip guidance articulations. Prosthet Orthot Int 3:37–43

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Kangude A, Burgstahler B, Durfee W (2010) Engineering evaluation of the energy-storing orthosis FES gait system. In: Conference proceedings IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, vol 1557. University of Minnesota, pp 5927–5930

  41. Thoumie P, Le Claire G, Beillot J, Dassonville J, Chevalier T, Perrouin-Verbe B, Bedoiseau M, Busnel M, Cormerais A, Courtillon A et al (1995) Restoration of functional gait in paraplegic patients with the RGO-II hybrid orthosis. A multi centre controlled study. Paraplegia 33:647–653

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Sykes L, Ross ER, Powell ES, Edwards J (1996) Objective measurement of use of the reciprocating gait orthosis (RGO) and the electrically augmented RGO in adult patients with spinal cord lesions. Prosthet Orthot Int 20:182–190

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Merati G, Sarchi P, Ferrarin M, Pedotti A, Veicsteinas A (2000) Paraplegic adaptation to assisted-walking: energy expenditure during wheelchair versus orthosis use. Spinal Cord 38:37–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Nene AV (1989) An assessment of the ORLAU Parawalker-electrical stimulation hybrid orthosis. In: International conference of IEEE engineering, Seattle, pp 1016–1017

  45. Shimada Y, Hatakeyama K, Minato T, Matsunaga T, Sato M, Chida S, Itoi E (2006) Hybrid functional electrical stimulation with medial linkage knee-ankle-foot orthoses in complete paraplegics. Tohoku J Exp Med 209:117–123

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Beillot JF, Le Claire C, Thoumie P (1996) Energy consumption of paraplegic locomotion using reciprocal gait orthosis. Eur J Appl Physiol 73:376–381

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Patrick JH, McClelland MR (1985) Low energy cost reciprocal walking for the adult paraplegic. Paraplegia 23:113–117

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rehabilitation Faculty of Isfahan, University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

    Mohammad Taghi Karimi

Authors
  1. Mohammad Taghi Karimi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammad Taghi Karimi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Karimi, M.T. Functional walking ability of paraplegic patients: comparison of functional electrical stimulation versus mechanical orthoses. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 23, 631–638 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-012-1049-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-012-1049-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation