Transtibial prosthesis suspension systems: Systematic review of literature

BackgroundToday a number of prosthetic suspension systems are available for transtibial amputees. Consideration of an appropriate suspension system can ensure that amputee's functional needs are satisfied. The higher the insight to suspension systems, the easier would be the selection for prosthetists. This review attempted to find scientific evidence pertaining to various transtibial suspension systems to provide selection criteria for clinicians.MethodsDatabases of PubMed, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect were explored to find related articles. Search terms were as follows: “Transtibial prosthesis (32), prosthetic suspension (48), lower limb prosthesis (54), below-knee prosthesis (58), prosthetic liner (20), transtibial (193), and prosthetic socket (111)”. Two reviewers separately examined the papers. Study design (case series of five or more subjects, retrospective or prospective), research instrument, sampling method, outcome measures and protocols were reviewed.FindingsBased on the selection criteria, 22 articles (15 prospective studies, and 7 surveys) remained. Sweat control was found to be a major concern with the available suspension liners. Donning and doffing procedures for soft liners are also problematic for some users, particularly those with upper limb weakness. Moreover, the total surface bearing (TSB) socket with pin/lock system is favored by the majority of amputees.InterpretationIn summary, no clinical evidence is available to suggest what kind of suspension system could have an influential effect as a “standard” system for all transtibial amputees. However, among various suspension systems for transtibial amputees, the Iceross system was favored by the majority of users in terms of function and comfort.