Prosthetic liner-socket design for children with long congenital and amputated shoulder

Cover Page


Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription or Fee Access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Traditional cosmetic prosthetic designs for a long shoulder stump in children have several disadvantages, such as a rigid uncomfortable receiving socket, the need to use a strap fastening, and the non-cosmetic product due to the disproportionate shoulder and forearm length compared with the preserved limb.

AIM: This study aimed to design, manufacture, and test a prototype of the shoulder stump liner-socket.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A new liner-socket of a shoulder cosmetic prosthesis has been developed, confirmed by a Russian Federation patent for an invention, which for the first time, in the practice of domestic prosthetics, is made of two types of silicone and has been successfully used in cosmetic prosthetics for 17 children, of whom 10 previously used traditional long stump prosthesis. Satisfaction with new liner-socket prosthesis was analyzed using a psychometric scale compared with a conventional prosthesis.

RESULTS: The developed design combines both the inner socket function, which allows the elbow hinge to be attached to it and the liner properties, which ensures a comfortable stay of the stump in the receiving socket due to the properties of silicone and excludes the use of traditional bandages.

CONCLUSIONS: The presented medical and technical solution ensures the simplicity and reliability of fastening the cosmetic shoulder stump prosthesis, including on the long shoulder stump, without disturbing the relatively healthy limb proportions, as well as wearing comfort.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Anton V. Kruglov

LLC North-West scientific-practical center of rehabilitation and prosthetics “Ortetika”; LLC prosthetic and orthopedic center “Scoliologic.ru”

Email: kruglov@scoliologic.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3811-5773
SPIN-code: 3312-5350
https://www.instagram.com/kruglov_scoliologic/

MD, PhD, The Head of upper limb prosthetic department

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg; Saint Petersburg

Gregory A. Lein

LLC prosthetic and orthopedic center “Scoliologic.ru”

Author for correspondence.
Email: lein@scoliologic.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7904-8688

MD, PhD

Russian Federation, Saint Petersburg

References

  1. Rukovodstvo po protezirovaniyu i ortezirovaniyu. In 2 vol. Ed. by M.A. Dyimochka, A.I. Suhoverova, BG Spivak. 3rd ed. Moscow; 2016. (In Russ.)
  2. Reabilitaciya invalidov: nacional’noe rukovodstvo. Ed. by G.N. Ponomarenko. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media; 2018. (In Russ.)
  3. Reabilitaciya invalidov: nacional’noe rukovodstvo. Kratkoe izdanie. Ed. by G.N. Ponomarenko. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media; 2020. (In Russ.)
  4. Zamilackij YuI, SHCHerbina KK, Andrievskaya AO, et al. Konstrukcii protezov verhnih konechnostej: uchebnoe posobie. Ed. by G.N. Ponomarenko. Saint Peterburg: CIACAN; 2019. (In Russ.)
  5. Zamilackij YuI, SHCHerbina KK, Suslyaev VG, et al. Tekhnologiya izgotovleniya priemnyh gil’z protezov verhnih konechnostej: uchebno-prakticheskoe posobie. Ed. by G.N. Ponomarenko. Saint Peterburg: CIACAN; 2019. (In Russ.)
  6. Gil’za-lajner dlya kul’ti plecha: pat. 2721540 RF, MPK A61F2/54. A.V. Kruglov, G.A. Lein; patentoobladatel’: Skoliolodzhik.ru. No. 2019137451; zayavl. 21 Nov 2019; opubl. 19 May 2020. (In Russ.)
  7. Ponomarenko GN, Shcherbina KK, Golubeva YB, Galaudina VV. On the quality of prosthetic and orthopedic appliances. Standards and Quality. 2020;(2):94−99. (In Russ.)
  8. Smirnova LM, Shcherbina KK, Galaudina VV, Golubeva YB. A regulatory framework for the quality assessment of prosthetics. Standards and Quality. 2019;(6):46−51.
  9. Salminger S, Stino H, Pichler LH, et al. Current rates of prosthetic usage in upper-limb amputees- have innovations had an impact on device acceptance? Disabil Rehabil. 2020:1−12. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2020/1866684
  10. Brack R, Amalu EH. A review of technology, materials and R&D challenges of upper limb prosthesis for improved user suitability. J Orthop. 2020;23:88−96. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2020.12.009
  11. Biddiss EA, Chau TT. Upper limb prosthesis use and abandonment: a survey of the last 25 years. Prosth Orthot Int. 2007;31(3):236−257. doi: 10.1080/03093640600994581
  12. Kyberd PJ, Hill W. Survey of upper limb prosthesis users in Sweden, the United Kingdom and Canada. Prosth Orthot Int. 2011;35(2):234−241. doi: 10.1177/0309364611409099
  13. Stephens-Fripp В, Walker MJ, Goddard E, et al. A survey on what Australians with upper limb difference want in a prosthesis: justification for using soft robotics and additive manufacturing for customized prosthetic hands. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2020;15(3):342−349. doi: 10.1080/17483107. 2019.1580777
  14. Sims T, Cranny A, Metcalf Ch, et al. Participatory design of pediatric upper limb prostheses: qualitative methods and prototyping. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017;33(6):629−637. doi: 10.1017/S0266462317000836

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
2. Fig. 1. Shoulder prosthesis liner diagram:

Download (50KB)
3. Fig. 2. Child S., 3 years old, long congenital stump of the shoulder before and after prosthetics with a cosmetic shoulder prosthesis

Download (233KB)
4. Fig. 3. Child K., 3 years old, ultrashort rudiment of the forearm before and after prosthetics with a cosmetic shoulder prosthesis

Download (5MB)

Copyright (c) 2021 Kruglov A.V., Lein G.A.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС77-54261 от 24 мая 2013 г.


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies