← Back to Search

3D-printed socket for Amputation

N/A
Waitlist Available
Led By Winfried Heim, MSc, C.P.(c)
Research Sponsored by West Park Healthcare Centre
Eligibility Criteria Checklist
Specific guidelines that determine who can or cannot participate in a clinical trial
Must have
Be older than 18 years old
Timeline
Screening 3 weeks
Treatment Varies
Follow Up through study completion, an average of 1 year
Awards & highlights

Summary

The most important aspect of a lower-limb prosthesis is the socket as the interface between the human and the mechanical prosthetic system. Proper fit of the socket to the residual limb is a critical factor in determining comfort, suspension, energy expenditure and ultimately the functional efficiency of the remaining prosthesis. Patients may not wear their prosthesis if they find the socket uncomfortable. Traditional manufacturing of prosthetic sockets is a high-skill process involving several stages. Capturing the shape of the residual limb and modifying the mould is performed with a manual, hands-on approach. This leads to inconsistencies between clinicians, and increases the likelihood of human error. There is opportunity to improve this process with advanced computer-aided design (CAD) and manufacturing (CAM). 3D printing can be leveraged for its ability to effortlessly manufacture one-off, complex and organic shapes, such as prosthetic sockets. However, the digital method removes the tactile feedback that the clinician generally benefits from when manually designing the socket, thus leading to some uncertainty in how they are modifying the socket. Moreover, the difference in the learning curve may cause inconsistencies in modifications made by different clinicians. While clinicians may be hesitant in their knowledge-transfer from a manual to digital method, sockets designed using CAD still produce successful outcomes. To facilitate wider-spread adoption of 3D printing as a standard tool in the clinic, more research is needed to better understand how the digital design process affects the geometry of the socket, and how this affects clinical outcomes for amputees. The investigators hypothesize that (1) digitally-designed sockets and manually-designed sockets will have geometric differences, (2) the digitally-designed socket will result in better clinical outcomes compared to manually-designed sockets, and (3) improved clinical outcomes will correlate to geometric differences centred on particular regions of the socket. However, a feasibility study is needed to inform an effective protocol. This feasibility study aims to explore socket geometries and prosthetic outcomes compared between manually-designed and digitally-designed devices for lower-limb amputees. Findings will help in improving the current 3D printing techniques and exploring outcomes for the users.

Timeline

Screening ~ 3 weeks
Treatment ~ Varies
Follow Up ~through study completion, an average of 1 year
This trial's timeline: 3 weeks for screening, Varies for treatment, and through study completion, an average of 1 year for reporting.

Treatment Details

Study Objectives

Study objectives can provide a clearer picture of what you can expect from a treatment.
Primary study objectives
Adherence to protocol
Patient recruitment rates
Patient retention rates
Secondary study objectives
L-test
Socket comfort score change
Socket geometric differences
+1 more
Other study objectives
Demographics
Physiological Cost Index

Trial Design

1Treatment groups
Experimental Treatment
Group I: 3D-printed socketExperimental Treatment1 Intervention
The 3D scan of the participant's residual limb will be digitally-modified and fabricated using 3D printing.
Treatment
First Studied
Drug Approval Stage
How many patients have taken this drug
3D-printed socket
2021
N/A
~10

Find a Location

Who is running the clinical trial?

West Park Healthcare CentreLead Sponsor
34 Previous Clinical Trials
2,306 Total Patients Enrolled
Winfried Heim, MSc, C.P.(c)Principal InvestigatorWest Park Healthcare Centre
~3 spots leftby Sep 2025