Skip to main content
Log in

Designing for Scale: Development of the ReMotion Knee for Global Emerging Markets

  • Published:
Annals of Biomedical Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Amputees living in developing countries have a profound need for affordable and reliable lower limb prosthetic devices. The World Health Organization estimates there are approximately 30 million amputees living in low-income countries, with up to 95% lacking access to prosthetic devices. Effective prosthetics can significantly affect the lives of these amputees by increasing opportunity for employment and providing improvements to long-term health and well-being. However, current solutions are inadequate: state-of-the-art solutions from the US and Europe are cost-prohibitive, while low-cost devices have been challenged by poor quality and/or unreliable performance, and have yet to achieve large scale impact. The introduction of new devices is hampered by the lack of a cohesive prosthetics industry in low-income areas; the current network of low-cost prosthetic clinics is informal and loosely organized with significant disparities in geography, patient volume and demographics, device procurement, clinical and logistical infrastructure, and funding. At D-Rev (Design Revolution) we are creating the ReMotion Knee, which is an affordable polycentric prosthetic knee joint that performs on par with devices in more industrialized regions, like the US and Europe. As of September 2012, over 4200 amputees have been fitted with the initial version of the ReMotion Knee through a partnership with the JaipurFoot Organization, with an 79% compliance rate after 2 years. We are currently scaling production of the ReMotion Knee using centralized manufacturing and distribution to serve the existing clinics in low-income countries and increase the availability of devices for amputees without access to appropriate care. At D-Rev, we develop products that target these customers through economically-sustainable models and provide a measurable impact in the lives of the world’s amputees.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. CR Equipements SA Prosthetics Catalog. Accessed on January 21, 2013. At http://www.crequipements.ch/CatalogCRE/product_info.php?cPath=5&products_id=2.

  2. Andrysek, J. Lower-limb prosthetic technologies in the developing world: a review of literature from 1994–2010. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 34:378–398, 2010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ayers, S. R., and R. V. Gonzalez. Implementation of a new polycentric knee technology in the developing world. In: Proceedings of the 13th World Congress of the International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics, pp. 2–3, 2010.

  4. Condie, E., H. Scott, and S. Treweek. Lower limb prosthetic outcome measures: a review of the literature 1995 to 2005. J. Prosthet. Orthot. 18:1–23, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Cummings, D. Prosthetics in the developing world: a review of the literature. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 20:51–60, 1996.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Deathe, A. B., and W. C. Miller. The L Test of Functional Mobility: measurement properties of a modified version of the timed “Up & Go” Test designed for people with lower-limb amputations. Phys. Therapy 85:626–635, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gallagher, P., F. Franchignoni, A. Giordano, and M. MacLachlan. Trinity amputation and prosthesis experience scales: a psychometric assessment using classical test theory and rasch analysis. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 89:487–496, 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Gard, S. The influence of four-bar linkage knees on prosthetic swing-phase floor clearance. J. Prosthet Orthot. 8:34–40, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Grisé, M. C., C. Gauthier-Gagnon, and G. G. Martineau. Prosthetic profile of people with lower extremity amputation: conception and design of a follow-up questionnaire. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 74:862–870, 1993.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Horgan, O., and M. MacLachlan. Psychosocial adjustment to lower-limb amputation: a review. Disabil. Rehabil. 26:837–850, 2004.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. International Institute for Population Sciences. National Family Health Survey (NFHS-3), Volume 1, 2005–06. Mumbai: Deonar, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Jensen, J., and W. Raab. Clinical field testing of trans-femoral prosthetic technologies: resin-wood and ICRC polypropylene. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 28:141–151, 2004.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Legro, M. W., G. D. Reiber, D. G. Smith, M. del Aguila, J. Larsen, and D. Boone. Prosthesis evaluation questionnaire for persons with lower limb amputations: assessing prosthesis-related quality of life. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 79:931–938, 1998.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Morris, J. N., and A. E. Hardman. Walking to health. Sports Med. 23:306–332, 1997.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Pearlman, J., R. A. Cooper, M. Krizack, A. Lindsley, Y. Wu, K. D. Reisinger, W. Armstrong, H. Casanova, H. S. Chhabra, and J. Noon. Lower-limb prostheses and wheelchairs in low-income countries. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag. 27:12–22, 2008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Radcliffe, C. Functional considerations in the fitting of above-knee prostheses. Artif. Limbs 2:35–60, 1955.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Radcliffe, C. The Knud Jansen lecture: above-knee prosthetics. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 1:146–160, 1977.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Radcliffe, C. Four-bar linkage prosthetic knee mechanisms: kinematics, alignment, and prescription criteria. Prosthet. Orthot. Int. 18:159–173, 1994.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Radcliffe, C. Biomechanics of Knee Stability Control with Four-Bar Prosthetic Knees. Proc. ISPO Australia Annual Meeting, 2003.

  20. Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Improved Technology Access for Landmine Survivors. State-of-the-Science on Appropriate Technology for Developing Countries, 2006.

  21. Rybarczyk, B., and D. Nyenhuis. Body image, perceived social stigma, and the prediction of psychosocial adjustment to leg amputation. Rehabil. Psychol. 40:95–110, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Schoppen, T., A. Boonstra, J. W. Groothoff, J. de Vries, L. N. H. Göeken, and W. H. Eisma. The timed “up and go” test: reliability and validity in persons with unilateral lower limb amputation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 80:825–828, 1999.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). The State of World Population 2011. New York, NY: United Nations, 2011.

  24. World Health Organization, and International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics. Guidelines for Training Personnel in Developing Countries for Prosthetics and Orthotics Services. New York, NY: World Health Organization, 2004.

  25. World Health Organization. World Report on Disability. New York, NY: World Health Organization, 2011.

  26. Yinusa, W., and M. Ugbeye. Problems of amputation surgery in a developing country. Int. Orthop. 27:121–124, 2003.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The ReMotion Knee project is the result of the efforts of many talented people beyond the existing team. We would like to thank and acknowledge the original team who developed the JaipurKnee: Joel Sadler, Eric Thorsell, Angelo Szychowski, and L. Ayo Roberts. We would also like to thank Armand Neukermans and our partners at BMVSS, including D. R. Mehta, Dr. M. K. Mathur, and Dr. Pooja Mukul. Finally, we thank prosthetist Gary Berke for his technical expertise and mentorship in the project. D-Rev: Design Revolution is a US-based 501c3 non-profit organization, and we thank individual supporters for the donations and guidance that make our work possible. This work has also been supported, in part, by the Lemelson Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samuel R. Hamner.

Additional information

Associate Editor Scott I Simon oversaw the review of this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hamner, S.R., Narayan, V.G. & Donaldson, K.M. Designing for Scale: Development of the ReMotion Knee for Global Emerging Markets. Ann Biomed Eng 41, 1851–1859 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-013-0792-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-013-0792-8

Keywords

Navigation