| pubmed-article:8233775 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0920848 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0224517 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1707455 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C1442080 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0945826 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0220812 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:issue | 2 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:dateCreated | 1993-12-9 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:abstractText | Twenty unilateral trans-femoral amputees fitted with either the Contoured Adducted Trochanteric-Controlled Alignment Method (CAT-CAM) socket (n = 10) or the quadrilateral (QUAD) socket (n = 10), and a "non-amputee" control group (n = 10) participated in the study. Subjects meeting the following criteria were studied: healthy males between the ages of 18 and 55 years, amputation due to non-vascular pathology, an unaffected sound limb, at least six months use of the test prosthesis, and a minimal stump length of 15 cm. Subjects ambulated in two randomized trials separated by 20 minutes of rest at 2 assigned speeds: a pace reflecting normal walking speed (97 m/min = 2.5 mph) or a slower speed (48.5 m/min = 1.25 mph). Heart rate (HR) and Oxygen uptake (VO2) measured during steady state walking were analyzed via two-way ANOVA. Differences among means were further analyzed using Tukey post hoc and simple effects tests. Significant differences were observed between the control group and CAT-CAM subjects with respect to VO2 (p < 0.05) and HR (p < 0.01) at the slower speed. The control group and subjects using the QUAD socket also differed with respect to VO2 (p < 0.01) and HR (p < 0.01) at the slower pace. Faster pace required more energy expenditure (p < 0.01) and produced higher HR (p < 0.01) than slower speeds. At faster pace, a significantly higher energy expenditure in the QUAD than the CAT-CAM group was observed (p < 0.01). It is concluded that ambulating at normal pace using the CAT-CAM socket design uses less energy than when using a QUAD socket design. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:citationSubset | IM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:month | Aug | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:issn | 0309-3646 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:LawrenceDD | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:NasiM TMT | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:NewellCC | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:SpyropoulosPP | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:GaileyR SRS | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:BurdittCC | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:issnType | Print | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:volume | 17 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:authorsComplete | Y | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:pagination | 95-100 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:dateRevised | 2006-11-15 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:8233775-... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:year | 1993 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:articleTitle | The CAT-CAM socket and quadrilateral socket: a comparison of energy cost during ambulation. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:affiliation | Dept. of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Miami School of Medicine, Florida. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:publicationType | Clinical Trial | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:publicationType | Comparative Study | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:publicationType | Randomized Controlled Trial | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:8233775 | pubmed:publicationType | Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't | lld:pubmed |
