Abstract
A trial has been performed to compare two designs of reciprocal walking orthosis for paralysed people—the hip guidance orthosis (HGO) from Oswestry, England, and the reciprocating gait orthosis (RGO) from New Orleans, USA.
Eighteen male and 4 female paraplegic subjects used each orthosis for 4 months, in a crossover study. All aspects of the provision and use of the devices were monitored, and a variety of assessments were made.
Fifteen subjects were able to use both orthoses, 5 were unable to use either and 2 succeeded with the HGO but not the RGO. At the end of the trial 12 subjects chose to keep the RGO, 4 the HGO, and 6 kept neither. Those choosing the RGO liked its appearance; those choosing the HGO liked the speed of donning and doffing. The RGO was about 50% more expensive to supply than the HGO.
Similar content being viewed by others
Article PDF
References
Douglas R, Larson P F D'Ambrosia R, McCall R E 1983 The LSU reciprocation-gait orthosis. Orthopedics 6: 834–838.
Rose G K 1979 The principles and practice of hip guidance articulations. Prosthetics Orthotics International 3: 37–43.
Whittle M W 1988 Paraplegic Locomotion. Clinical Rehabilitation 2: 45–49.
Whittle M W, Cochrane G M 1989 A comparative trial of the hip guidance orthosis and the reciprocating gait orthosis. Health Equipment Information series No. 192, HM Stationery Office, London.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Whittle, M., Cochrane, G., Chase, A. et al. A comparative trial of two walking systems for paralysed people. Spinal Cord 29, 97–102 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.1991.13
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sc.1991.13
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Energy consumption of paraplegic locomotion using reciprocating gait orthosis
European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Physiology (1996)