1 / 22

Stump Cone

BioEng 1161 Dept of Bioengineering University of Pittsburgh April 18, 2005. Stump Cone. Marissa Ammer Jonisha Pollard Alison Saulsbery Mentor: Bob Maguire DeLatorre Orthotics and Prosthetics, Inc. Amputation Procedure. www.wheelessonline.com.

keona
Download Presentation

Stump Cone

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BioEng 1161 Dept of Bioengineering University of Pittsburgh April 18, 2005 Stump Cone Marissa Ammer Jonisha Pollard Alison Saulsbery Mentor: Bob Maguire DeLatorre Orthotics and Prosthetics, Inc.

  2. Amputation Procedure www.wheelessonline.com Sugarbaker, Bickels, Malawer; “Above-knee Amputation” www. Sarcoma.org

  3. Background • Post-amputation dressings are applied to stump to: • Reduce edema (fluid collection) • Prevent Thrombo (clotting) and embolic (occlusion of blood vessels) complications • Stabilize stump shape • Protect the stump from injury • Three types of dressings: soft, semi-rigid, rigid • Soft dressings become a hassle, rigid dressings do not allow for wound cleaning or expansion • Our device is semi-rigid

  4. Types of Dressings Soft Rigid Semi Rigid Ace bandage Cast “Crash Helmet”

  5. Competitive Analysis • Soft dressings, Ace Bandages • Rigid dressings, such as casts • Weight bearing devices, such as FloTech • Semi-rigid removable dressings, such as PSRRD, “Crash Helmet”

  6. Design Criteria • The Stump Cone will use surgical spacer socks that can easily accommodate shape change throughout the day • As the residual limb becomes smaller, the device will be able to fit around it maintaining compression • The shell will be a harder plastic to protect the limb against bumps and falls

  7. Economic Consideration • Hopefully covered by health insurance, but if not completely, still relatively inexpensive. • Market Size – $360 million in North America • 3 million patients • $1200 allowable charge for insurance (Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield) • Product will be distributed through hospitals and medical centers

  8. SolidWorks Modeling • First designs in the planning stage

  9. Final Design

  10. Advantages of the New Design • Shock protection • Via Comcore – patented composite material with excellent impact strength and fatigue life

  11. Advantages • Fluid Drainage through drainage holes

  12. Advantages • Adjustable • “clam shell” • Velcro strapping

  13. Advantages • Pressure Relief • Thermo plastic material • Bottom opening

  14. Advantages • Antibacterial Protection • Charcoal padding- activated charcoal absorbs bacterial toxins and odor.

  15. Advantages • Non-weight bearing • Less bulk • No buttock support • More comfortable for user

  16. Advantages • Best of both worlds • Integrating features from soft and rigid dressings

  17. Methods to Test the Stump Cone • Run an FEA in COSMOSWorks • Survey prosthetists on what they think of the device

  18. Results of FEA Testing 50 lbs Normal Force Factor of Safety = 4.2 (Design Check)

  19. Results from Testing • Survey Results from Prosthetists: • Comfort Level: 8 • Pressure: 8 • Ease of Use: 8.75 • Adjustability: 7.25 • Protection: 9.25 • On Scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is the best

  20. FDA Regulations • Class I Device • Permanent Device (greater than 30 days of use) • Contact with the skin

  21. Acknowledgements • Funding Contributions • Drs. Hal Wrigley and Linda Baker • The Bioengineering Department • Donation of Materials from DeLatorre O&P • DeLatorre O&P of Pittsburgh Personnel • Brian – the technician that made our prototype • Drew Buffat, CP - Director of Prosthetics • Bob Maguire, CP • Jason, Head Prosthetic Technician • Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh

  22. "...devices like those are the best for treatment." " Absolutely! It would shape the limb wonderfully."

More Related