Puzzled about pressure casting

Puzzled about pressure casting

Dear Colleagues,

While the concept of hydrostatic sockets is appealing from the standpoint of
evenly distributed forces, as soon as the pt loses volume distally, it would
seem you have lost that advantage and are back to the kinds of compensation
techniques used in a standard total surface bearing socket- and therefore not
necessarily obtaining true hydrostatic support and blurring the difference
between hydrostatic and total surface bearing.

In addition, most of the pressure cast sockets I have seen are very rounded
and seem to be more prone to rotation.

I have no doubt that people are getting good results, especially initially.
It just seems that the theory breaks down once volume has been lost- In this
case it seems better to start out with a total surface bearing socket cast
with contours that prevent rotation.

I am presenting these ideas for discussion and would like to know how the
successful users of the pressure casting system would address them. The
simplicity and speed of the system is appealing....

Also, is there a profile for those who might be more optimal candidates for
this pressure casting technique?

 Gerald Stark CPO presented an excellent paper at the last Academy meeting
discussing different casting techniques. I wasn't at the meeting but these
are the types of ideas and papers where it would be beneficial to have panel
discussions with questions from the audience

Mark Benveniste CP