MedTrace Logo

Comparative Performance of Dynamic Elastic Response Feet

NCT02542761 · Status: COMPLETED · Phase: NA · Type: INTERVENTIONAL · Enrollment: 10

Last updated 2018-09-20

Study results available
· View outcomes & findings →

Summary

The purpose of this study was to compare the functional performance of individuals with transtibial amputation using two types of prosthetic foot designs: carbon fiber vs. fiberglass composite.

Conditions

  • Transtibial Amputation - Unilateral

Interventions

DEVICE

Fiberglass Composite foot

The Rush foot is a fiberglass composite energy storage and return prosthetic foot.

DEVICE

Carbon Fiber Composite Foot

All types of currently commercially available carbon fiber energy storage and return prosthetic feet will be considered appropriate.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Principal Investigators

  • Kenton R Kaufman, PhD · Mayo Clinic

Study Design

Allocation
NON_RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Model
CROSSOVER

Eligibility

Min Age
21 Years
Sex
ALL
Healthy Volunteers
No

Timeline & Regulatory

Start
2015-06-30
Primary Completion
2015-12-31
Completion
2016-05-31
FDA Device
Yes

Countries

  • United States

Study Locations

More Related Trials

Entities

Companies

Read the full study record

This page highlights key information. For complete eligibility criteria, study locations, investigator contacts, and the full protocol, visit the original record on ClinicalTrials.gov.

View NCT02542761 on ClinicalTrials.gov