Asymmetric gait is sometimes developed in individuals with central nervous system damage, such as stroke, or in persons who have suffered damage to the spinal cord, brainstem, cerebellum, or motor cortex. In such cases, a limp is developed and the person does not fully extend his foot far enough backward, which can prevent him from effectively pushing off into the swing phase of his gait.
In such cases, rehabilitation is often provided using a split-belt treadmill having two independent belts that can be operated at different speeds to exaggerate the asymmetry of the person's gait. In particular, the belt associated with the weak leg can be driven faster than the belt associated with the strong leg. An adaptation process occurs during such rehabilitation such that, once the belts are operated at the same speed, an altered walking pattern is retained as an after-effect.
Continuous and repeated split-belt gait training has been found to temporarily restore a normal walking pattern. However, individuals with such corrected walking patterns typically only retain them for a short period of time and the gait pattern often does not transfer to walking over a normal walking surface, such as the floor or ground. Because the adaptation effects only last for a short period of time, the effects of long-term training are still unknown.
In view of the above discussion, it can be appreciated that it would be desirable to have a way to provide rehabilitation to persons with asymmetric gait other than using split-belt treadmill therapy.
The present disclosure may be better understood with reference to the following figures. Matching reference numerals designate corresponding parts throughout the figures, which are not necessarily drawn to scale.
As described above, it would be desirable to have a way to provide rehabilitation to persons with asymmetric gait other than using split-belt treadmill therapy. Disclosed herein are gait-altering shoes that, at least in some cases, provide similar rehabilitation to the person but without limiting him or her to walking on a treadmill. In some embodiments, the shoes transform the downward force of a user's weight into a force that shifts the user's foot backward to exaggerate the user's asymmetric gait. As with a split-belt treadmill, this forces the user to put forth greater effort with his or her weak leg and helps restore normal function. In some embodiments, the gait-altering shoe includes wheels having a varying radius that automatically rotate backward under the weight of the user. In some embodiments, one or more springs are used to return the wheels to their original positions when the user lifts his or her foot and one or more dampers are used to control the backward rotation of the wheels.
Because this disclosure pertains to altering a user's gait, it is worthwhile to review the basics of a normal human gait pattern. The gait cycle can be divided into two distinct phases: the stance phase, in which the user applies weight to the walking surface, and the swing phase, in which the user swings the leg forward to take the next step. As is shown in
The concept of context awareness is an important consideration when altering a user's gait. Context awareness is the user's ability to unconsciously anticipate the environment while preparing for disturbances. This can be witnessed in situations in which a person relies upon visual cues, such as stepping onto a non-operating escalator. In particular, as an individual approaches the escalator, the individual will automatically prepare to engage the escalator by leaning forward. If the escalator is not moving, however, the person may become unbalanced. This occurs because the body's internal model expects that forward lean is necessary when getting on the escalator because of the individual's many previous interactions with it, but the person stumbles because there is no acceleration from the non-moving escalator. Context awareness provides evidence of visual exteroception and the role it plays in the conditioning of the human gait and gait adaptation process in hemiplegic patients.
It is this context awareness that is hypothesized to be an integrating factor in the inability to store the previously-described feed-forward motion learned in split-belt gait manipulation research. While after-effects can be achieved, the learned gait motion disappears quickly once subjects adapt to the asymmetric treadmill speed and subsequently walk over a normal walking surface, such as the floor or ground. This may occur because the visual cues perceived while walking on a treadmill are very different from those perceived while walking over the floor or ground.
If the person's gait could be adjusted in the natural context of walking (as opposed to the context of walking on a treadmill), the problem of context awareness during the gait adaptation process would be removed. In such a case, there would be no disconnect between the visual cues perceived during the conditioning process and the visual cues perceived during the adaptation process. This suggests that gait should be adjusted with an apparatus that can be used in the natural walking context. One such apparatus is a gait-altering shoe. As is described below, a gait-altering shoe can be used to passively convert the vertical force of the user during the stance phase and redirect it into a backward motion as would a moving belt of a treadmill. Unlike when a treadmill is used, however, the backward motion is provided in the natural walking context.
In the illustrated embodiment, the front portion 12 of the frame 11 is defined by a base 16, lateral sides 18, and a top platform 20. Although the base 16, sides 18, and platform 20 are shown in the figures as being separate components, it is noted that one or more of these components can be unitarily formed from the same piece of material. In some embodiments, the components are made of a polymeric or lightweight metal material. Irrespective of the construction of the front portion 12, the platform 20 is sized and configured so as to extend across an area that is slightly greater than that of the front part of the user's foot. In some embodiments, the platform 20 can have a width of approximately 2.5 to 5 inches and a length of approximately 2 to 6 inches.
The rear portion 14 of the frame 11 is defined by a base 22, lateral sides 24, and a top platform 26. Although the base 22, sides 24, and platform 26 are shown in the figures as being separate components, it is noted that one or more of these components can also be unitarily formed from the same piece of material. In some embodiments, the components are made of a polymeric or lightweight metal material. Irrespective of the construction of the rear portion 14, the platform 26 is sized so as to span an area that is slightly greater than that of the rear part of the user's foot. In some embodiments, the platform 26 can have a width of approximately 2.5 to 5 inches and a length of approximately 6 to 10 inches.
As is further apparent from
With further reference to
Fixedly mounted to each end of the axles 32, 34 is a wheel 40. Together, the four wheels 40 support the gait-altering shoe 10 above a walking surface, such as the floor or ground.
The above-described wheel shape is an important aspect of the gait-altering shoe design. When the wheel 40 is attached to an axle, its spiral shape redirects the wearer's downward force FV during the stance phase into a horizontal backward motion, as shown in
Assuming a linear increase in the size of the wheel (n=1), changing the slope at different points along the outer surface of the wheel enables optimization of the force generated at each instant of the stance phase because the relationship is based on the slope of the wheel in polar coordinates. In some embodiments, the largest radius of the wheel is approximately 2.75 inches (7.0 cm), the shortest radius is approximately 1.0 inches (2.54 cm), and n=1 so that the wheels generate an average horizontal backward force of 36 pounds (160 N) assuming an 800 pound (180 N) vertical downward force from the user.
In some embodiments, the outer surfaces 44 of the wheels 40 can be coated with a high-friction coating, such as a rubber or polymeric coating, to ensure that the wheel does not slip on the walking surface to which it is applied. Such a coating can further absorb some of the initial force transmitted to the shoe 10 when the wheel 40 first comes into contact with the walking surface.
With reference again to
When the rear wheels 40 rotate backward, for example, during the stance phase of the gait cycle, the rear axle 34 and pulley 56 likewise rotate backward. When this occurs, the cable 54 is pulled toward the rear of the rear portion 14 and the spring 50 is stretched. As the heel is lifted and the force of the user's weight is removed, however, the spring 50 pulls on the cable 54 causing the pulley 56 to rotate forward, thereby returning the rear wheels 40 to their initial positions. When the front wheels 40 rotate backward, for example, during the stance phase of the gait cycle, the front axle 32 and pulley 64 likewise rotate backward. When this occurs, the cable 62 is pulled forward and the spring 58 is stretched. As the foot is lifted and the force of the user's weight is removed, however, the spring 58 pulls on the cable 62, causing the pulley 64 to rotate forward, thereby returning the front wheels 40 to their initial positions.
With particular reference to
During use, the dampers 66, 68 limit the rotation speed of the wheels 40 and prevent a jerky motion when the user steps on the gait-altering shoe 10. Because the dampers 66, 68 are unidirectional, they do not limit the speed of forward rotation of the wheels 40 and therefore enable the wheels to quickly return to their initial positions. In some embodiments, the dampers 66, 68 provide approximately 17 lb-in (1.9 N-m) of torque per axle. That amount of torque is adequate for a 180 pound (82 kg) user, but works for a range of 150 pounds (68 kg) to 190 pounds (86 kg) and can be adjusted as needed for other wearers.
As is further shown in
In image A of
In image B, which illustrates the mid-stance phase, the user has placed all of his weight on the gait-altering shoe 10. As a result, all of the wheels 40 have rotated about their axles. By way of example, the bottom of the user's shoe S is approximately 1.5 inches above the floor surface at this point. Because of the variable radiuses of the wheels 40, this rotation has caused the shoe 10 and the user's foot to move backward from the initial contact point.
In image C, the user has begun to raise his heel and the rear wheels 40 have rotated forward under the force of the spring 50 (see
In image D, which shows the toe-off phase, the user is about to lift his foot off of the floor. As is apparent from that image, the rear wheels 40 no longer touch the floor and have moved closer toward their original positions because of the spring 50. In addition, the front wheels 40 have begun to return to their original positions under the force of the spring 58 (see
The therapy that the above-described gait-altering shoe provides differs significantly from that of split-belt treadmills. While the body's velocity relative to the walking surface is zero on a split-belt treadmill, the relative velocity of the gait-altering shoe is non-zero and forward. The gait-altering shoe forces the wearer's foot backward whereas the stationary foot has a zero velocity relative to the walking surface. It is anticipated that prolonged use of the gait-altering shoe will yield positive after-effects in individuals with asymmetric gait and enable those individuals to develop a more persistent symmetric gait. Training an individual with the gait-altering shoe may also strengthen muscles due to the different walking pattern that is developed, which in turn could alter the individual's gait.
Testing was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of a gait-altering shoe having a construction similar to that described above. The testing involved three subjects who were all university student males, ages 20-25, with normal walking patterns. All three subjects were measured on their baseline walking pattern before walking on the gait-altering shoe. Temporal and spatial variables of gait were evaluated using the GAITRite Walkway System (CIR Systems, Inc., PA), which is a 2-foot (0.6 m) by 16-foot (4.9 m) walkway comprising pressure sensors that are able to accurately monitor each step position. The testing emphasized the change in step length between the baseline and immediately post-training.
For the baseline measurement, each subject walked on the GAITRite Walkway System five separate times. The average step length of all five trials was recorded and later compared to post-training step length. The baseline readings were analyzed for any initial asymmetry of the subject's gait before the gait-altering shoe was strapped to the foot with the shorter step length (if present). This was done because an individual with an asymmetric gait, such as a stroke patient, would have a shorter step length on the hemiplegic side. Accordingly, the gait-altering shoe was attached to the “hemiplegic” leg of the healthy subject in order to increase the step length although the asymmetry was very small or nonexistent. In order to compensate for the height and weight of the gait-altering shoe, the subjects wore an adjustable platform on the other foot.
Each of the subjects walked back and forth on a 48-foot (14.6 m) thin carpet walkway for approximately 20 minutes. The thin carpet was used in order to increase the friction between the smooth wheels and the floor. The subjects were observed during the training and were encouraged to take normal heel-to-toe steps in order to keep a consistent gait. After 20 minutes of gait training on the gait-altering shoe, the subject was seated in a rolling chair and the gait-altering shoe and support platform were removed. The subject was then rolled to the GAITRite Walkway System in order to capture the initial steps. The subject proceeded to walk five separate times on the walkway system and each trial was recorded for later comparison to the average baseline step length.
A retention test was also performed in order to determine if any after-effects persisted over a longer time period. This was achieved by enabling the subject to walk around for 10 additional minutes at a comfortable pace without stopping. After the subject walked 10 minutes, the subject walked on the GAITRite mat five more times and an average retention step length was recorded for later analysis.
In pretesting, the gait-altering shoe pushed the user's foot back an average of 7 inches (17.8 cm) in a continuous, steady, and smooth motion. Because of its deformability, the shoe enabled the user to toe off correctly for a smooth transition into the swing phase. Every step was consistent and there was little variation, much like a split-belt treadmill. This low variation from step to step was important because it was a goal of the study to mimic the motion of a split-belt treadmill.
As mentioned above, the gait-altering shoe closely mimics a split-belt treadmill. However, unlike the split-belt treadmill, which has a tread speed ratio of 2:1, the tested gait-altering shoe had a foot speed ratio of 4:3.
The differences in step length between the foot with the gait-altering shoe and the other foot are shown in
Test Subject 1 showed no average difference in step length increase, but rather a slight decrease of 0.36 inches (0.92 cm) in the reverse direction. It is apparent from
The baseline average and all five post-training trials are shown in
Various modifications can be made to the disclosed gait-altering shoe without materially changing its underlying functionality. For example, although the front and rear axles have been illustrated and described as being independent of each other, they can be coupled together with a linkage (e.g., a chain or belt) so that they rotate in unison. In such a case, a single spring can be used to return all of the wheels to their original positions and/or a single damper can be used to control rotation of all wheels during the stance phase of the gait cycle. In other embodiments, the direction in which the wheels rotate can be reversed so that the shoe propels the foot forward instead of moving it backward.
In some cases, a gait-altering shoe 10 can be worn on one foot and a gait-altering shoe 90 can worn on the other foot to further exaggerate the gait asymmetry and generate the greatest motion differential between the feet. In other cases, a gait-altering shoe 90 can be worn on each foot to propel both feet forward during ambulation. In still further cases, a gait-altering shoe 10 can be worn on each foot to displace each foot backward to provide exercise.
This application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/600,267, filed Feb. 17, 2012, which is hereby incorporated by reference herein in its entirety.
This invention was made with Government support under grant 1 R21 HD066200-01, awarded by the National Institutes of Health. The Government has certain rights in the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
942333 | Lennox | Dec 1909 | A |
4416293 | Anderson | Nov 1983 | A |
4600016 | Boyd | Jul 1986 | A |
4631676 | Pugh | Dec 1986 | A |
4745930 | Confer | May 1988 | A |
4813436 | Au | Mar 1989 | A |
5299454 | Fuglewicz | Apr 1994 | A |
5382052 | Tarng | Jan 1995 | A |
5474087 | Nashner | Dec 1995 | A |
5607376 | Magid | Mar 1997 | A |
5613690 | McShane | Mar 1997 | A |
5831937 | Weir | Nov 1998 | A |
5899963 | Hutchings | May 1999 | A |
5947486 | Zell | Sep 1999 | A |
5955667 | Fyfe | Sep 1999 | A |
6059062 | Staelin | May 2000 | A |
6162151 | Tani | Dec 2000 | A |
6237923 | Fowle | May 2001 | B1 |
6689075 | West | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6811523 | Timmer | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6836744 | Asphahani | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6882955 | Ohlenbusch | Apr 2005 | B1 |
7150722 | Tyrrell | Dec 2006 | B1 |
7153242 | Goffer | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7367569 | Viitamaki | May 2008 | B2 |
7383908 | Tuli | Jun 2008 | B2 |
7422550 | Pinero | Sep 2008 | B1 |
7552021 | Bar-Haim | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7632239 | Dar | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7648472 | McCarthy | Jan 2010 | B2 |
7938756 | Rodetsky et al. | May 2011 | B2 |
7988647 | Bunn | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8006795 | Manor | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8052629 | Smith et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8142381 | Birnbaum | Mar 2012 | B1 |
8209147 | Solinsky | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8413998 | Sano | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8613691 | Bosecker | Dec 2013 | B2 |
9027690 | Chavand | May 2015 | B2 |
9180025 | Goldfarb | Nov 2015 | B2 |
20040154192 | Bengtsson | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20050261609 | Collings | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20110257764 | Collings | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060247104 | Grabiner | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060249315 | Herr | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070130804 | Levy | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070275830 | Lee | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080134541 | Bar-Haim | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080146968 | Hanawaka | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20100038983 | Bhugra | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100076360 | Shimada | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100268129 | Park | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100298102 | Bosecker | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20110208444 | Solinsky | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20130197407 | Flythe, Jr. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
20140162858 | Dalebout | Jun 2014 | A1 |
20140262576 | Tuli | Sep 2014 | A1 |
Entry |
---|
Ismet Handiz, “Design and Testing of a Motion Controlled Gati Enhancing Mobile Shoe (GEMS) for Rehabilitation”, pp. 1-110, Mar. 22, 2011. |
Groot, et al. “Gait Enhancing Mobile Shoe (GEMS) for Rehabilitation”, Third Joint Eurohaptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, Mar. 18-20, 2009. |
II. Handzic, E. Vasudevan, and K B. Reed, “Motion Controlled Gait Enhancing Mobile Shoe for Rehabilitation,” Proc. of the 12th Intl. Conf. on Rehabilitation Robotics (ICORR), Zurich, Switzerland, Jun. 2011. |
Handzic, et al., Design and Pilot Study of a Gait Enhancing Mobile Shoe, SpringerLink, Dec. 2011, vol. 2, Issue 4, pp. 193-201. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61600267 | Feb 2012 | US |