214 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30255802)
21. Degree of Safety Against Falls Provided by 4 Different Prosthetic Knee Types in People With Transfemoral Amputation: A Retrospective Observational Study.
Palumbo P; Randi P; Moscato S; Davalli A; Chiari L
Phys Ther; 2022 Apr; 102(4):. PubMed ID: 35079822
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Survey of transfemoral amputee experience and priorities for the user-centered design of powered robotic transfemoral prostheses.
Fanciullacci C; McKinney Z; Monaco V; Milandri G; Davalli A; Sacchetti R; Laffranchi M; De Michieli L; Baldoni A; Mazzoni A; Paternò L; Rosini E; Reale L; Trecate F; Crea S; Vitiello N; Gruppioni E
J Neuroeng Rehabil; 2021 Dec; 18(1):168. PubMed ID: 34863213
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Mobility analysis of amputees (MAAT 3): Matching individuals based on comorbid health reveals improved function for above-knee prosthesis users with microprocessor knee technology.
Wurdeman SR; Stevens PM; Campbell JH
Assist Technol; 2020 Sep; 32(5):236-242. PubMed ID: 30592436
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Cost utility analysis of knee prosthesis with complete microprocessor control (C-leg) compared with mechanical technology in trans-femoral amputees.
Gerzeli S; Torbica A; Fattore G
Eur J Health Econ; 2009 Feb; 10(1):47-55. PubMed ID: 18379831
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Functional added value of microprocessor-controlled knee joints in daily life performance of Medicare Functional Classification Level-2 amputees.
Theeven P; Hemmen B; Rings F; Meys G; Brink P; Smeets R; Seelen H
J Rehabil Med; 2011 Oct; 43(10):906-15. PubMed ID: 21947182
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Physiological parameters analysis of transfemoral amputees with different prosthetic knees.
Li S; Cao W; Yu H; Meng Q; Chen W
Acta Bioeng Biomech; 2019; 21(3):135-142. PubMed ID: 31798017
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Influence of advanced prosthetic knee joints on perceived performance and everyday life activity level of low-functional persons with a transfemoral amputation or knee disarticulation.
Theeven PJ; Hemmen B; Geers RP; Smeets RJ; Brink PR; Seelen HA
J Rehabil Med; 2012 May; 44(5):454-61. PubMed ID: 22549656
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Impact of a stance phase microprocessor-controlled knee prosthesis on level walking in lower functioning individuals with a transfemoral amputation.
Eberly VJ; Mulroy SJ; Gronley JK; Perry J; Yule WJ; Burnfield JM
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2014 Dec; 38(6):447-55. PubMed ID: 24135259
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Effects of microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees on self-reported mobility, quality of life, and psychological states in patients with transfemoral amputations.
Şen Eİ; Aydın T; Buğdaycı D; Kesiktaş FN
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc; 2020 Sep; 54(5):502-506. PubMed ID: 33155559
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Energy expenditure and activity of transfemoral amputees using mechanical and microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees.
Kaufman KR; Levine JA; Brey RH; McCrady SK; Padgett DJ; Joyner MJ
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2008 Jul; 89(7):1380-5. PubMed ID: 18586142
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Perceived self-efficacy and specific self-reported outcomes in persons with lower-limb amputation using a non-microprocessor-controlled versus a microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee.
Möller S; Hagberg K; Samulesson K; Ramstrand N
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2018 Apr; 13(3):220-225. PubMed ID: 28366038
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. The utility of the single-subject method for comparison of temporal-spatial gait changes between a microprocessor and non-microprocessor prosthetic knees.
Howard CL; Wallace C; Perry B; Stokic DS
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2020 Jun; 44(3):133-144. PubMed ID: 32186241
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Measures and procedures utilized to determine the added value of microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee joints: a systematic review.
Theeven PJ; Hemmen B; Brink PR; Smeets RJ; Seelen HA
BMC Musculoskelet Disord; 2013 Nov; 14():333. PubMed ID: 24279314
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Cost Analyses of Prosthetic Devices: A Systematic Review.
Donnelley CA; Shirley C; von Kaeppler EP; Hetherington A; Albright PD; Morshed S; Shearer DW
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2021 Jul; 102(7):1404-1415.e2. PubMed ID: 33711275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Developing prescribing guidelines for microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees in the South East England.
Sedki I; Fisher K
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2015 Jun; 39(3):250-4. PubMed ID: 24669001
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Gait and balance of transfemoral amputees using passive mechanical and microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees.
Kaufman KR; Levine JA; Brey RH; Iverson BK; McCrady SK; Padgett DJ; Joyner MJ
Gait Posture; 2007 Oct; 26(4):489-93. PubMed ID: 17869114
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Direct medical costs of accidental falls for adults with transfemoral amputations.
Mundell B; Maradit Kremers H; Visscher S; Hoppe K; Kaufman K
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2017 Dec; 41(6):564-570. PubMed ID: 28641476
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Outcomes associated with the use of microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knees among individuals with unilateral transfemoral limb loss: a systematic review.
Sawers AB; Hafner BJ
J Rehabil Res Dev; 2013; 50(3):273-314. PubMed ID: 23881757
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Evaluation of function, performance, and preference as transfemoral amputees transition from mechanical to microprocessor control of the prosthetic knee.
Hafner BJ; Willingham LL; Buell NC; Allyn KJ; Smith DG
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2007 Feb; 88(2):207-17. PubMed ID: 17270519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Clinical Outcomes Comparing Two Prosthetic Knee Designs in Individuals with Unilateral Transfemoral Amputation in Turkey.
Yazgan A; Kutlutürk S; Lechler K
Can Prosthet Orthot J; 2021; 4(1):35297. PubMed ID: 37614931
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
