Skip to main content
Fig. 3 | Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation

Fig. 3

From: Understanding patient preference in prosthetic ankle stiffness

Fig. 3

Potential anthropomorphic and metabolic factors. A Preferred VSPA stiffness versus body mass. Across all subjects, no significant linear trend was identified (p = 0.615). Points show intra-subject mean preferred stiffness across all trials and speeds. Error bars show SEM. B Metabolic cost versus VSPA stiffness. Metabolic expenditure did not change significantly with VSPA stiffness (LMEM, p > 0.5). As expected, metabolic cost was significantly different (p < 0.0001) at the self-selected, slow, and fast walking speeds. Each subject’s metabolic cost values are normalized to the cost measured while they walked on their daily-use prosthesis at their self-selected speed. Stiffness values are normalized to each subject’s preferred stiffness at each speed. Light lines show second-order fits to the inter-subject mean metabolic cost for each stiffness and speed (plotted points). Error bars indicate SEM

Back to article page