Ankle Articulation Vs. Shock Pylon
Mark Raabe
Description
Collection
Title:
Ankle Articulation Vs. Shock Pylon
Creator:
Mark Raabe
Date:
8/24/1999
Text:
Dear Colleagues,
A recent message posted by Mark Benveniste CP, raised the issue of ankle articulation and the prescription criteria for such componentry.
This topic is one that could be expanded upon to include a new range of components, ie. Vertical shock pylon, T/T Pylon etc. collectively I will refer to them as Pogo Sticks.
As you may surmise from the description used above, my opinion of the Pogo Stick range is one of scepticism. I would dearly like to encourage a list discussion about this subject to gauge experience and opinions other than my own, (my own being limited).
There is no doubt that in nearly all cases of a Pogo Stick upgrade the response is a positive one, with comfort being the big C word. It worries me however that we have provided a vertical compression that can only be returned in one way - vertically. I know that during my studies in P&O, that an important Biomechanics principle was to minimise the vertical displacement of the centre of mass during gait. A vertical displacement followed by subsequent vertical replacement that is provided by the Pogo Sticks is surely forming a tangent away from these principles.
The more normalised gait pattern incorporating an articulated ankle provides not only compression qualities but at the same time dissipates these via a further progression into the gait cycle, (plantarflexion). This is achievable now-a-days with a range of feet, from the simple single axis with bumper design to energy storage systems present at the heel component.
It would be interesting to hear from anyone with research into this area, ie. Centre of mass differentials with and without Pogo Sticks; Energy expenditure comparisons; Long term effects of vertical displacement on the spine?
I look forward to reading your responses on this topic, it is I believe the main reason for this list - Information exchange leading to professional development of the Prosthetist/Orthotist
I eagerly await,
Mark Raabe
Division Manager
Technical Orthopaedics
Otto Bock (A/Asia)
Ph. +61 2 9319 6852
Fax. +61 2 9699 1459
Mob. 0414 682 301
<Email Address Redacted>
A recent message posted by Mark Benveniste CP, raised the issue of ankle articulation and the prescription criteria for such componentry.
This topic is one that could be expanded upon to include a new range of components, ie. Vertical shock pylon, T/T Pylon etc. collectively I will refer to them as Pogo Sticks.
As you may surmise from the description used above, my opinion of the Pogo Stick range is one of scepticism. I would dearly like to encourage a list discussion about this subject to gauge experience and opinions other than my own, (my own being limited).
There is no doubt that in nearly all cases of a Pogo Stick upgrade the response is a positive one, with comfort being the big C word. It worries me however that we have provided a vertical compression that can only be returned in one way - vertically. I know that during my studies in P&O, that an important Biomechanics principle was to minimise the vertical displacement of the centre of mass during gait. A vertical displacement followed by subsequent vertical replacement that is provided by the Pogo Sticks is surely forming a tangent away from these principles.
The more normalised gait pattern incorporating an articulated ankle provides not only compression qualities but at the same time dissipates these via a further progression into the gait cycle, (plantarflexion). This is achievable now-a-days with a range of feet, from the simple single axis with bumper design to energy storage systems present at the heel component.
It would be interesting to hear from anyone with research into this area, ie. Centre of mass differentials with and without Pogo Sticks; Energy expenditure comparisons; Long term effects of vertical displacement on the spine?
I look forward to reading your responses on this topic, it is I believe the main reason for this list - Information exchange leading to professional development of the Prosthetist/Orthotist
I eagerly await,
Mark Raabe
Division Manager
Technical Orthopaedics
Otto Bock (A/Asia)
Ph. +61 2 9319 6852
Fax. +61 2 9699 1459
Mob. 0414 682 301
<Email Address Redacted>
Citation
Mark Raabe, “Ankle Articulation Vs. Shock Pylon,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 2, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/212392.
