Trial Outcomes & Findings for Assessment of Safety and Performances of a 3D Printed Prosthetic Foot: A Pilot Study (NCT NCT06938087)

NCT ID: NCT06938087

Last Updated: 2026-02-27

Results Overview

The subject starts from a sitting position. At the "Start" signal, the subject stands up from the chair, walks in a closed 10-meters L-shaped path, and sits down on the same chair. The time necessary to complete the path is measured with a stopwatch. The lower the time to complete the path, the higher the functional mobility.

Recruitment status

COMPLETED

Study phase

NA

Target enrollment

3 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

Day 1 and Day 2

Results posted on

2026-02-27

Participant Flow

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure
PROFLEX Prosthesis First, Then PROFIL Prosthesis
The group consisted of 3 subjects with trans-tibial amputation, expert users of prosthetic foots. PROFLEX prosthetic foot is the reference device. PROFIL prosthetic foot is the prototype.
First intervention (1 day)
STARTED
3
First intervention (1 day)
COMPLETED
3
First intervention (1 day)
NOT COMPLETED
0
Second intervention (1 day)
STARTED
3
Second intervention (1 day)
COMPLETED
3
Second intervention (1 day)
NOT COMPLETED
0

Reasons for withdrawal

Withdrawal data not reported

Baseline Characteristics

Race and Ethnicity were not collected from any participant.

Baseline characteristics by cohort

Baseline characteristics by cohort
Measure
PROFLEX Prosthesis First, Then PROFIL Prosthesis
n=3 Participants
The group consisted of 3 subjects with trans-tibial amputation, expert users of prosthetic foots. PROFLEX prosthetic foot is the reference device. PROFIL prosthetic foot is the prototype.
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
3 Participants
n=3 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
0 Participants
n=3 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
3 Participants
n=3 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Italy
3 Participants
n=3 Participants
Years since amputation
17 Years
n=3 Participants
Age
52 Years
n=3 Participants

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

Adverse events may be: falling, stumbling, lower back pain as consequence of the prosthesis foot use, stump pain as consequence of the prosthesis foot use, breakage of the prosthesis foot

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Number of Adverse Events Occurred During Use of the Intervention Prosthesis Foot
0 Adverse Events
0 Adverse Events

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

The IMUs record joints kinematics while subjects perform a series of motor tasks, i.e. walk of flat surfaces at a self-selected speed and ascend/descend stairs and ramps. In particular, the following variables are measured: range of motion of ankle joint (prosthetic ankle), knee joint, and hip joint of the impaired lower limb. The measured angles are normalized on a gait cycle (0% = heel strike, 100% = toe off). The outocome variable is computed as mean difference between the normalized measured angles and the normalized reference value taken from the literature.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Lower Limb Joint Angles Measured With Inertial Measurements Units (IMUs)
ANKLE ROM: Difference between measured joint angles and reference angle normalized on a gait cycle
-7.4 Degree
Standard Deviation 12.84
0.87 Degree
Standard Deviation 11.91
Change From Comparator of Lower Limb Joint Angles Measured With Inertial Measurements Units (IMUs)
KNEE ROM: Difference between measured joint angles and reference angle normalized on a gait cycle
4.83 Degree
Standard Deviation 17.83
6.69 Degree
Standard Deviation 14.71
Change From Comparator of Lower Limb Joint Angles Measured With Inertial Measurements Units (IMUs)
HIP ROM: Difference between measured joint angles and reference angle normalized on a gait cycle
3.08 Degree
Standard Deviation 14.81
3.48 Degree
Standard Deviation 16.82

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

The optoelectronic system records joints kinematics while subjects walk of a flat surfaces at a self-selected speed. In particular, the following variables are measured: range of motion of ankle joint (prosthetic ankle), knee joint, and hip joint of the impaired lower limb. The measured angles are normalized on a gait cycle (0% = heel strike, 100% = toe off). The outocome variable is computed as mean difference between the normalized measured angles and the normalized reference value taken from the literature.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Lower Limb Joint Angles Measured With an Optoelectronic System
ANKLE ROM: Difference between measured joint angles and reference angle normalized on a gait cycle
-6.29 Degree
Standard Deviation 11.55
3.01 Degree
Standard Deviation 11.97
Change From Comparator of Lower Limb Joint Angles Measured With an Optoelectronic System
KNEE ROM: Difference between measured joint angles and reference angle normalized on a gait cycle
7.63 Degree
Standard Deviation 18.18
8.63 Degree
Standard Deviation 19.87
Change From Comparator of Lower Limb Joint Angles Measured With an Optoelectronic System
HIP ROM: Difference between measured joint angles and reference angle normalized on a gait cycle
0.61 Degree
Standard Deviation 19.18
-3.92 Degree
Standard Deviation 19.71

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

Hill Assessment Index (HAI) is a 12-points ordinal scale used to evaluate ramp ascending quality; the higher the score the better the gait quality while ascending ramps (0 = cannot do/refuse to do, 11 = even step, without assistive device) .

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Gait Quality Wihile Ascending Ramps With Hill Assessment Index (HAI)
11 Units on a scale
Interval 11.0 to 11.0
11 Units on a scale
Interval 11.0 to 11.0

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

Stair Ascending Index (SAI) is 14-points ordinal scale used to quantify stair ascending qualty; the higher the score the better the gait quality while ascending stairs (0 = cannot do/refuse to do, 13 = Without rail or assistive device, step-over-step pattern)

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Gait Quality While Ascending Stairs With Stair Ascending Index (SAI)
13 Units on a scale
Interval 13.0 to 13.0
13 Units on a scale
Interval 13.0 to 13.0

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

The subject is asked to stand still on a force plate for 30 seconds. The sway path of the Centre of Pressure (COP) is recorded. The higher the valure the sway path, the lower the equilibrium in orthostatism. This outcome measure is performed with the eyes open and closed

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Equilibrium in Orthostatism by Mean of Force Plates
Sway path of the COP: eyes open
807.04 Millimeters
Standard Deviation 137.51
919.18 Millimeters
Standard Deviation 178.47
Change From Comparator of Equilibrium in Orthostatism by Mean of Force Plates
Sway path of the COP: eyes closed
1516.43 Millimeters
Standard Deviation 858.86
1944.95 Millimeters
Standard Deviation 1184.38

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

The subject is asked to sit on a chair with both the feets (sound foot and prosthesis foot) on different force plates. At the "Start" signal, the subject stands up, stands still for 5 seconds and sits down. The weigth distribution on the lower limbs is recorded during the entire task. The symmetry index is computed as the ratio between: the difference between the load peak of the ground reaction force (GRF) measured in the sound side and the load peak of the ground reaction force (GRF) measured in the impaired side ON the sum between the load peak of the ground reaction force (GRF) measured in the sound side and the load peak of the ground reaction force (GRF) measured in the impaired side. Asymmetry index = \[(peak GRF sound - peak GRF impaired) / (peak GRF sound + peak GRF impaired)\]\*100%

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Load Simmetry While Standing up/Sitting Down From/on a Chiar by Mean of Force Plates
Asymmetry index during sit-to-stand
12.14 Percentage
Standard Deviation 6.98
9.73 Percentage
Standard Deviation 7.75
Change From Comparator of Load Simmetry While Standing up/Sitting Down From/on a Chiar by Mean of Force Plates
Asymmetry index during stand-to-sit
10.89 Percentage
Standard Deviation 6.46
13.06 Percentage
Standard Deviation 5.17

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

AMP is a 21-item objectve measure in which static and dynamic sitting and standing activities, as well as transfer and gait skills of progressing difficulty are performed. Score range is 0-47. Higher scores indicate better mobility. Based on the final score, 4 groups are defined (K1 = 15-26, K2 = 27-36, K3 = 37-42, K4 = 43-47).

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Amputee Mobility Predictor (AMP-PRO)
46 Scores on a scale
Interval 46.0 to 46.0
46 Scores on a scale
Interval 46.0 to 46.0

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

The subject starts from a sitting position. At the "Start" signal, the subject stands up from the chair, walks in a closed 10-meters L-shaped path, and sits down on the same chair. The time necessary to complete the path is measured with a stopwatch. The lower the time to complete the path, the higher the functional mobility.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Functional Mobility Measured With the L-test
21 Seconds (rounded to closer integer)
Interval 20.0 to 22.0
19 Seconds (rounded to closer integer)
Interval 18.0 to 20.0

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Day 1 and Day 2

Usability is measured with an ad hoc custom-made 6-items questionnaire. Each item ranges 1 to 5. To compute the final score, each item is summed up (total range: 6-30). The higher the score, the better the usability.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 Participants
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Change From Comparator of Usability of the Prosthesis Foot
23 Points
Interval 16.0 to 28.0
25 Points
Interval 23.0 to 25.0

Adverse Events

PROFIL Prosthesis Foot

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 0 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Serious adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Other adverse events

Other adverse events
Measure
PROFIL Prosthesis Foot
n=3 participants at risk
Recruited subjects with below kenen amputation wearing the experimental prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Current Prosthesis Foot (PROFLEX XC)
n=3 participants at risk
Recruited subjects with below knee amputation wearing the currently used prosthesis foot (PROFIL)
Product Issues
Breakage of the prosthetic foot
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
Product Issues
Permanent deformation of the prosthetic foot
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Slippage and quasi-fall of the subject during the trial
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Slippage and fall of the subject during the trial
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Skin irritation of the stump
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Back pain
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test
0.00%
0/3 • Day 1 and Day 2 of test

Additional Information

Giovanni Hamoui

INAIL

Phone: +39 051 6936476

Results disclosure agreements

  • Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
  • Publication restrictions are in place