Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 May 19;8(2):24730114231172734.
doi: 10.1177/24730114231172734. eCollection 2023 Apr.

Functional, Spiroergometric, and Subjective Comparisons Between Forearm Crutches and Hands-Free Single Crutches in a Crossover Study

Daiwei Yao  1   2 , Louisa Meyer-Kobbe  3 , Sarah Ettinger  2   4 , Leif Claassen  2   5 , Anna Altemeier-Sasse  2   4 , Christian Sturm  6 , Arno Kerling  6 , Christina Stukenborg-Colsman  2 , Christian Plaass  2
Affiliations

Functional, Spiroergometric, and Subjective Comparisons Between Forearm Crutches and Hands-Free Single Crutches in a Crossover Study

Daiwei Yao et al. Foot Ankle Orthop. .

Abstract

Background: Following below-knee surgery, the optimal medical mobility device remains controversial as adequate nonweightbearing of the operated extremity is critical to ensure successful healing. The use of forearm crutches (FACs) is well established but requires using both upper extremities. The hands-free single orthosis (HFSO) is an alternative that spares the upper extremities. This pilot study compared functional, spiroergometric, and subjective parameters between HFSO and FAC.

Methods: Ten healthy (5 females, 5 males) participants were asked to use HFSOs and FACs in a randomized order. Five functional tests were performed: climbing stairs (CS), an L-shaped indoor course (IC), an outdoor course (OC), a 10-meter walk test (10MWT), and a 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Tripping events were counted while performing IC, OC, and 6MWT. Spiroergometric measurements consisted of a 2-step treadmill test with speeds of 1.5 and 2 km/h, each for 3 minutes. Lastly, a VAS questionnaire was completed to collect data regarding comfort, safety, pain, and recommendations.

Results: Significant differences between both aids were observed in CS and IC (HFSO: 29.3 seconds; FAC: 26.1 seconds, P < .03; and HFSO: 33.2 seconds, FAC: 18 seconds, P < .001, respectively). The other functional tests showed no significant differences. The trip events were not significantly different between the use of the 2 aids. Spiroergometric tests showed significant differences regarding heart rate (HFSO: 131.1 bpm at 1.5 km/h and 131 bpm at 2 km/h; FAC: 148.1 bpm at 1.5 km/h and 161.8 bpm at 2 km/h) and oxygen consumption (HFSO: 15.4 mL/min/kg at 1.5 km/h and 16 mL/min/kg at 2 km/h; FAC: 18.3 mL/min/kg at 1.5 km/h and 21.9 mL/min/kg at 2 km/h) at both speeds (all P < .01). In addition, significantly different ratings regarding the items comfort, pain, and recommendation were recorded. Both aids were equally rated for safety.

Conclusion: HFSOs may be an alternative to FACs, especially in activities that require physical stamina. Further prospective studies in patients with below-knee surgical intervention concerning everyday clinical use would be interesting.

Level of evidence: Level IV pilot-study.

Keywords: crutches; hands-free crutch; postoperative care; postoperative nonweightbearing.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. ICMJE forms for all authors are available online.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Hands-free single crutch iWALK 2.0 (iWALKFree, Inc, Long Beach, CA).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Image of the IWalk 2.0 in the worn state. Note the 90-degree bend of the knee and the positioning of the lower leg on the padding surface. This allows a nonweightbearing of the foot or lower leg without the use of the arms.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Indoor parkour setup with an L-shape design and the structural floor panels (Terrasensa BASIS trade company, Kassel, Germany).
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
The outdoor parkour used in this study with its obstacle elements such as a 3-step staircase or 10 degrees ramp.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Andrews BJ, Granat MH, Heller BW, MacMahon J, Keating L, Real S.Improved harness crutch to reduce upper limb effort in swing-through gait. Med Eng Phys. 1994;16(1):15-18. doi:10.1016/1350-4533(94)90004-3 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Berli M, Kokegei D, Schäfer M, Teutrine P. 8 Technische Hilfen. In: Greitemann B, Baumgartner R, eds. Technische Orthopädie. 4th ed.Georg Thieme Verlag; 2018:266-270. doi:10.1055/b-0037-146295 - DOI
    1. Bohannon RW.Comfortable and maximum walking speed of adults aged 20-79 years: reference values and determinants. Age Ageing. 1997;26(1):15-19. doi:10.1093/ageing/26.1.15 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dalton A, Maxwell D, Kreder H, Borkhoff C.Prospective clinical evaluation comparing standard axillary crutches with the hands free crutch. Physiother Can. 2002;54(2):110-115.
    1. Dewar C, Grindstaff TL, Farmer B, et al.. EMG activity with use of a hands-free single crutch vs a knee scooter. Foot Ankle Orthop. 2021;6(4):247301142110600. doi:10.1177/24730114211060054 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources