AmputationNCT05267639
Clinical Outcomes With Passive MPKs vs. Powered Prosthetic Knees
A study testing Power Knee in people with Amputation and Amputation; Traumatic, Leg, Lower, run by Liberating Technologies, Inc. at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The goal of this proposed project is to gather community-based data from the K4-level Transfemoral Amputee (TFA) population to aid in evidence-based prescription of powered prosthetic knees (i.e., choosing the right device to maximize the benefit for each patient). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Amputation, Amputation; Traumatic, Leg, Lower, Limb; Absence, Congenital, Lower
- What is being tested?
- Power Knee
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 13 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 May 2022to 28 Aug 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Are at least 18 years old
- Unilateral transfemoral prosthesis user (limb absence between the knee and hip)
- Current user of a microprocessor-controlled knee (MPK)
- Have adequate clearance between distal end and ground for necessary knee and foot components
- Medicare Functional Classification Level (K-Level): 4
- Socket-Comfort Score: 6 or above to ensure adequate socket fit
Show all 9Show fewer
- PLUS-M T-score of 55 or above
- Six months or more experience on a prosthesis
- Body weight between 50kg and 116kg (110lbs - 256lbs)
Who cannot join
- Present injuries to residual limb or contralateral leg affecting functional ability
- Socket issues/changes in the last 6 weeks
- Users with bone-anchored implants
- Subjects can be excluded at the discretion of the investigator for other unforeseen disqualifying criteria (such as specific cognitive issues, etc.). Subjects in this study will not be discriminated by sex/gender or race/ethnicity.
- Using a knee that the subject is unfamiliar with may increase the risk of falling. Therefore, pregnant women should not participate in the study and will be screened by self-disclosure.
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country.
United States2 sites
Hanger Clinic
Austin, Texas, 78758
Liberating Technologies, Inc.
Holliston, Massachusetts, 01746
About this study
Official title: Clinical Outcomes With Passive MPKs vs. Powered Prosthetic Knees by K4-level Transfemoral Amputees
The goal of this proposed project is to gather community-based data from the K4-level Transfemoral Amputee (TFA) population to aid in evidence-based prescription of powered prosthetic knees (i.e., choosing the right device to maximize the benefit for each patient). The investigators envision that this Level 1 submission will transition into a larger follow-on Level 2 trial that will explore a larger spectrum of patient populations (K2-K4), as well as testing additional Power Knees currently in development that are expected to become commercialized in the near future. The investigators intend to use this Level 2 trial data to guide the implementation of effective prescriptions towards those that can benefit most from a given device and limit prescription to those who would not see benefit in order to ensure the most judicious use of Department of Defense (DoD) and Veteran's Affairs healthcare dollars. The findings will also be shared with the research community to help drive the design of future devices by identifying what features and functions are most beneficial to which patient populations when the devices are used outside of the laboratory. In summary, more community-based data on how powered prosthetic knees compare with MPKs is needed to allow for improved clinical decision making and clinical outcomes.
Read the detailed description
The goal of this proposed project is to gather community-based data from the K4-level Transfemoral Amputee (TFA) population to aid in evidence-based prescription of powered prosthetic knees (i.e., choosing the right device to maximize the benefit for each patient). The investigators envision that this Level 1 submission will transition into a larger follow-on Level 2 trial that will explore a larger spectrum of patient populations (K2-K4), as well as testing additional Power Knees currently in development that are expected to become commercialized in the near future. The investigators intend to use this Level 2 trial data to guide the implementation of effective prescriptions towards those that can benefit most from a given device and limit prescription to those who would not see benefit in order to ensure the most judicious use of Department of Defense (DoD) and Veteran's Affairs healthcare dollars. The findings will also be shared with the research community to help drive the design of future devices by identifying what features and functions are most beneficial to which patient populations when the devices are used outside of the laboratory. In summary, more community-based data on how powered prosthetic knees compare with MPKs is needed to allow for improved clinical decision making and clinical outcomes.
This study will focus on investigating the tradeoffs between the commercially available Ossur Power Knee and traditional MPKs to identify the prosthetic knee that is best suited for K4 users during different tasks. The investigators will assess measured, observed, and self-reported outcomes achieved through real-world use of the prosthetic knees.
The results of this study will (1) provide initial data to inform the evidence-based prescription and use of powered knee technologies for K4-level individuals with sound scientific data, (2) provide pilot data for a larger clinical trial to further inform the evidence-based prescription of powered knee technologies to other K-levels to maximize patient benefit while optimizing device cost and thereby influencing clinical practice and informing policy decisions, and (3) provide data that can be disseminated to other researchers to inform the design of future powered prosthetic knees by understanding the needs of users and identifying the features and functions that are most valuable to this patient population as well as the capabilities and limitations of current devices.
The primary outcome measures for each aim are outlined as follows:
- [Mobility Primary Outcome]: daily number of steps taken
- [Safety Primary Outcome]: Activities-Specific Balance Scale
- [Wellbeing Primary Outcome]: PEQ-Well-Being (PEQ-WB)
The exploratory data collected in the in-clinic and take-home portions of this study will include number of steps and number of self-reported falls, and a series of standard outcomes measures, such as: 6MWT, SAI, RAI, PROMIS-PF short form, PLUS-M, TUG, ABC, RPE, PROMIS-Fat, fall count, PROMIS-29, ODI, PEQ-WB, and PROMIS-APSRA short form.
The investigators plan to perform a pilot longitudinal randomized crossover study to compare the powered knee and passive microprocessor knees in individuals with unilateral transfemoral amputation. The two interventions, or conditions, to be tested are: (A) Ossur PK and (B) a standard MPK. For this study the investigators will recruit individuals who are currently MPK users; therefore, for the MPK condition, they will wear their usual prosthesis (e.g. Otto Bock C-leg, Össur Rheo, etc) as they represent the current standard of care. This will be recorded as a potential confounder in post-hoc analysis. Each participant will be provided with prosthetic knees for the powered knee condition.
The order these conditions are tested in will be randomized across subjects. Block randomization using a previously developed custom software based on random number generation will be used to equally distribute the subjects into the 2 possible intervention orders (AB or BA). For each condition, the subject will be trained on and acclimated to the device during the first month of the take-home period, and then will continue to wear it at home after training for a total of three months per condition. There may be seasonal effects due to the timing of when the various test conditions are administered, however, the investigators plan to offset these effects with condition randomization, multiple site testing, and staggered start times.
Testing will consist of test sessions, training sessions, at-home wear of the device, and functional and self-report assessment at the end of each intervention condition. If the subject's current foot is not compatible with the Power Knee, they will be provided with a commercially available prosthetic foot for the study. In this case, the subject will be given an initial acclimation period of 1 month on the new foot before starting interventional testing.
After receiving IRB and HRPO (US Army Human Research Protection Office) approval, subjects will be recruited and screened for eligibility. If they are eligible and decide to participate, they will be scheduled for their first site visit. They will either be consented over the phone before their first site visit or at the first site visit. If over the phone, study staff will use the telephone script to confirm eligibility and guide the subject through consent form details. Subjects will be provided the informed consent form to read through entirely before signing, and are encouraged to ask questions at any time.
Prior to each condition, each subject will be fit and aligned on the knee by a trained certified prosthetist. An activity monitor (such as the GeneActiv™) will be worn by the subject. As the investigators have done in prior studies, the investigators will use the activity monitor to track the number of steps the subjects take in each condition. Each subject will wear the same foot for all study periods for comparability between the two knee conditions.
The subject will wear the knee being tested at home for three months. During the first month of each condition, subjects will be given time to acclimate to the knee being tested. Before and after each condition, the subject will complete a battery of outcomes and self-report surveys. Subjects will participate in at least two, but up to eight, 1 hour training sessions per knee. At a minimum, each subject will receive one training session to learn how to properly use each device for a variety of daily activities and a second session to demonstrate retention of the learned skills. The subject will continue training until they show retention of the understanding and/or proficiency of the device functions or until they have received eight training sessions, whichever comes first. After 8 training sessions, they will have completed all of the available training and will therefore continue with the study at their current proficiency level. For the powered knee condition, the investigators will work with trained and experienced clinicians, consulting prosthetic knee manufacturers as needed, to develop the training protocol and determine proficiency. At the last training session, the subject will complete a subset of the outcomes and self-report measures in order to collect and compare data from before and after the subject gets trained on each knee condition.
After the training visits are completed, subjects will be asked to continue to wear the knee full time for the remainder of the three month take-home period. Through Hanger's current patient care system, the investigators will have the ability to push out a digital to the patient's phone asking them whether they have experienced a recent fall. If they respond positively that they had a fall, follow up questions can be asked to get more specific details about the fall. After three months of at-home wear, the subject will return for the second test visit. During that visit, functional tests and self-report surveys will be administered. At the completion of the second test visit (Period 1), the subject will then be fit and aligned on the prosthetic knee condition for Period 2. The training, at home wear, and in-clinic assessments will be repeated for the next knee condition.
- Conditions
- Amputation, Amputation; Traumatic, Leg, Lower, Limb; Absence, Congenital, Lower, Prosthesis User, Lower Limb Amputation Above Knee (Injury), Amputation; Traumatic, Leg: Thigh, Between Hip and Knee
- Being tested
- Power Knee
- Keywords
- amputee, lower limb amputee, transfemoral amputee, prosthetic knee, power knee, microprocessor knee, MPK, Ossur, lower limb prosthesis user
- Medical subject headings
- Wounds and Injuries
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Power KneeDevice
Also called Ossur Power Knee, Ossur Power Knee III, PK, PK3
Newest version of the commercially-available Power Knee developed by Ossur.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control (MPK) | No intervention | The subject will wear their usual Microprocessor Knee (MPK) for 3 months, as well as in the lab to complete outcome measures. |
| Power Knee | Experimental | The subject will wear the Ossur PK in place of their usual MPK for 3 months, as well as in the lab to complete outcome measures. Receives: Device: Power Knee |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Daily Step Count
Prior to each condition, each subject will be fit and aligned on the designated knee by a trained certified prosthetist. An activity monitor (such as the GeneActiv™) will be worn by the subject for each intervention period during the final month of the condition. Similar to prior studies, the investigators will use the activity monitor to track the number of steps the subjects take in each condition per day.
The number of steps per day are averaged over the final month in each condition. A higher value indicates a better outcome.
Measured: 1 Month
Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC) - Measuring Change From Baseline
Activities-specific balance confidence (ABC) scale is a structured questionnaire that measures an individual's confidence during ambulatory activities without falling or experiencing a sense of unsteadiness. It consists of 16 questions gauging the individual's confidence while doing activities, from 0 (no confidence) to 4 (complete confidence). Therefore, the total score ranges from 0 to 64, with a higher value indicating a better outcome.
This survey will be given at the end of each study condition (2 conditions, 3 months per condition). This survey will be administered as a part of the master questionnaire.
Analysis is reported in % of balance confidence, which is found by taking their average of all questions (sum up all questions and divide by total number of questions) and dividing that average by 4.
Measured: At the end of each 3 month condition
PEQ-Well Being (PEQ-WB) - Measuring Change From Baseline
The version of the PEQ which will be administered consists of 2 questions in 1 category (well being). For purposes of easier administration, the investigators have adopted the modified 10-point ordinal scale version of the PEQ-WB (scale 1-10, where 1 is the worst and 10 is the best relative to the questions being asked).
This survey will be given at the end of each study condition (2 conditions, 3 months per condition). This survey will be administered as a part of the master questionnaire.
The reported result is the average of the 2 questions in the PEQ-WB. The range of this reported result is 1-10, where a higher value indicates a better outcome.
Measured: At the end of each 3 month condition
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted4 Mar 2022
- Study start1 May 2022
- Primary completion28 Aug 2024
- Study completion28 Aug 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for AmputationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- Participants will take home two interventional devices for data collection and feedback. One of the interventions will be their usual microprocessor knee to collect as a control, and the other will be the commercially available Ossur Power Knee. Participants will be trained on the interventional knees during the first month of at-home use. Functional outcome measures and self-report surveys will also be completed in-lab before and after each take-home intervention, as well as at the last training visit, in order to form a detailed comparison between the two interventions.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 13 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Liberating Technologies, Inc.
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Hanger Clinic: Prosthetics & Orthotics
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Jennifer Johansson, Liberating Technologies, Inc.
- Investigators
- Jennifer Johansson, MS, Principal investigator, Liberating Technologies, Inc.
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05267639
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 20216190
- Status last verified
- Aug 2026
- First submitted
- 9 Dec 2021
- Last updated
- 17 Sep 2026
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Sep 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Clinical Outcomes With Passive MPKs vs. Powered Prosthetic Knees by K4-level Transfemoral Amputees
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05267639
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 20216190
- Conditions
- Amputation, Amputation; Traumatic, Leg, Lower, Limb; Absence, Congenital, Lower, Prosthesis User, Lower Limb Amputation Above Knee (Injury), Amputation; Traumatic, Leg: Thigh, Between Hip and Knee
- Keywords
- amputee, lower limb amputee, transfemoral amputee, prosthetic knee, power knee, microprocessor knee, MPK, Ossur
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 13 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Liberating Technologies, Inc.Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- Hanger Clinic: Prosthetics & Orthotics
- Study start
- 1 May 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 28 Aug 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 28 Aug 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 4 Mar 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 26 Jun 2025
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this proposed project is to gather community-based data from the K4-level Transfemoral Amputee (TFA) population to aid in evidence-based prescription of powered prosthetic knees (i.e., choosing the right device to maximize the benefit for each patient). The investigators envision that this Level 1 submission will transition into a larger follow-on Level 2 trial that will explore a larger spectrum of patient populations (K2-K4), as well as testing additional Power Knees currently in development that are expected to become commercialized in the near future. The investigators intend to use this Level 2 trial data to guide the implementation of effective prescriptions towards those that can benefit most from a given device and limit prescription to those who would not see benefit in order to ensure the most judicious use of Department of Defense (DoD) and Veteran's Affairs healthcare dollars. The findings will also be shared with the research community to help drive the design of future devices by identifying what features and functions are most beneficial to which patient populations when the devices are used outside of the laboratory. In summary, more community-based data on how powered prosthetic knees compare with MPKs is needed to allow for improved clinical decision making and clinical outcomes.
Detailed description
The goal of this proposed project is to gather community-based data from the K4-level Transfemoral Amputee (TFA) population to aid in evidence-based prescription of powered prosthetic knees (i.e., choosing the right device to maximize the benefit for each patient). The investigators envision that this Level 1 submission will transition into a larger follow-on Level 2 trial that will explore a larger spectrum of patient populations (K2-K4), as well as testing additional Power Knees currently in development that are expected to become commercialized in the near future. The investigators intend to use this Level 2 trial data to guide the implementation of effective prescriptions towards those that can benefit most from a given device and limit prescription to those who would not see benefit in order to ensure the most judicious use of Department of Defense (DoD) and Veteran's Affairs healthcare dollars. The findings will also be shared with the research community to help drive the design of future devices by identifying what features and functions are most beneficial to which patient populations when the devices are used outside of the laboratory. In summary, more community-based data on how powered prosthetic knees compare with MPKs is needed to allow for improved clinical decision making and clinical outcomes.
This study will focus on investigating the tradeoffs between the commercially available Ossur Power Knee and traditional MPKs to identify the prosthetic knee that is best suited for K4 users during different tasks. The investigators will assess measured, observed, and self-reported outcomes achieved through real-world use of the prosthetic knees.
The results of this study will (1) provide initial data to inform the evidence-based prescription and use of powered knee technologies for K4-level individuals with sound scientific data, (2) provide pilot data for a larger clinical trial to further inform the evidence-based prescription of powered knee technologies to other K-levels to maximize patient benefit while optimizing device cost and thereby influencing clinical practice and informing policy decisions, and (3) provide data that can be disseminated to other researchers to inform the design of future powered prosthetic knees by understanding the needs of users and identifying the features and functions that are most valuable to this patient population as well as the capabilities and limitations of current devices.
The primary outcome measures for each aim are outlined as follows:
- [Mobility Primary Outcome]: daily number of steps taken
- [Safety Primary Outcome]: Activities-Specific Balance Scale
- [Wellbeing Primary Outcome]: PEQ-Well-Being (PEQ-WB)
The exploratory data collected in the in-clinic and take-home portions of this study will include number of steps and number of self-reported falls, and a series of standard outcomes measures, such as: 6MWT, SAI, RAI, PROMIS-PF short form, PLUS-M, TUG, ABC, RPE, PROMIS-Fat, fall count, PROMIS-29, ODI, PEQ-WB, and PROMIS-APSRA short form.
The investigators plan to perform a pilot longitudinal randomized crossover study to compare the powered knee and passive microprocessor knees in individuals with unilateral transfemoral amputation. The two interventions, or conditions, to be tested are: (A) Ossur PK and (B) a standard MPK. For this study the investigators will recruit individuals who are currently MPK users; therefore, for the MPK condition, they will wear their usual prosthesis (e.g. Otto Bock C-leg, Össur Rheo, etc) as they represent the current standard of care. This will be recorded as a potential confounder in post-hoc analysis. Each participant will be provided with prosthetic knees for the powered knee condition.
The order these conditions are tested in will be randomized across subjects. Block randomization using a previously developed custom software based on random number generation will be used to equally distribute the subjects into the 2 possible intervention orders (AB or BA). For each condition, the subject will be trained on and acclimated to the device during the first month of the take-home period, and then will continue to wear it at home after training for a total of three months per condition. There may be seasonal effects due to the timing of when the various test conditions are administered, however, the investigators plan to offset these effects with condition randomization, multiple site testing, and staggered start times.
Testing will consist of test sessions, training sessions, at-home wear of the device, and functional and self-report assessment at the end of each intervention condition. If the subject's current foot is not compatible with the Power Knee, they will be provided with a commercially available prosthetic foot for the study. In this case, the subject will be given an initial acclimation period of 1 month on the new foot before starting interventional testing.
After receiving IRB and HRPO (US Army Human Research Protection Office) approval, subjects will be recruited and screened for eligibility. If they are eligible and decide to participate, they will be scheduled for their first site visit. They will either be consented over the phone before their first site visit or at the first site visit. If over the phone, study staff will use the telephone script to confirm eligibility and guide the subject through consent form details. Subjects will be provided the informed consent form to read through entirely before signing, and are encouraged to ask questions at any time.
Prior to each condition, each subject will be fit and aligned on the knee by a trained certified prosthetist. An activity monitor (such as the GeneActiv™) will be worn by the subject. As the investigators have done in prior studies, the investigators will use the activity monitor to track the number of steps the subjects take in each condition. Each subject will wear the same foot for all study periods for comparability between the two knee conditions.
The subject will wear the knee being tested at home for three months. During the first month of each condition, subjects will be given time to acclimate to the knee being tested. Before and after each condition, the subject will complete a battery of outcomes and self-report surveys. Subjects will participate in at least two, but up to eight, 1 hour training sessions per knee. At a minimum, each subject will receive one training session to learn how to properly use each device for a variety of daily activities and a second session to demonstrate retention of the learned skills. The subject will continue training until they show retention of the understanding and/or proficiency of the device functions or until they have received eight training sessions, whichever comes first. After 8 training sessions, they will have completed all of the available training and will therefore continue with the study at their current proficiency level. For the powered knee condition, the investigators will work with trained and experienced clinicians, consulting prosthetic knee manufacturers as needed, to develop the training protocol and determine proficiency. At the last training session, the subject will complete a subset of the outcomes and self-report measures in order to collect and compare data from before and after the subject gets trained on each knee condition.
After the training visits are completed, subjects will be asked to continue to wear the knee full time for the remainder of the three month take-home period. Through Hanger's current patient care system, the investigators will have the ability to push out a digital to the patient's phone asking them whether they have experienced a recent fall. If they respond positively that they had a fall, follow up questions can be asked to get more specific details about the fall. After three months of at-home wear, the subject will return for the second test visit. During that visit, functional tests and self-report surveys will be administered. At the completion of the second test visit (Period 1), the subject will then be fit and aligned on the prosthetic knee condition for Period 2. The training, at home wear, and in-clinic assessments will be repeated for the next knee condition.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Participants will take home two interventional devices for data collection and feedback. One of the interventions will be their usual microprocessor knee to collect as a control, and the other will be the commercially available Ossur Power Knee. Participants will be trained on the interventional knees during the first month of at-home use. Functional outcome measures and self-report surveys will also be completed in-lab before and after each take-home intervention, as well as at the last training visit, in order to form a detailed comparison between the two interventions.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control (MPK) | No intervention | –The subject will wear their usual Microprocessor Knee (MPK) for 3 months, as well as in the lab to complete outcome measures. |
| Power Knee | Experimental | Device: Power KneeThe subject will wear the Ossur PK in place of their usual MPK for 3 months, as well as in the lab to complete outcome measures. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Are at least 18 years old
- Unilateral transfemoral prosthesis user (limb absence between the knee and hip)
- Current user of a microprocessor-controlled knee (MPK)
- Have adequate clearance between distal end and ground for necessary knee and foot components
- Medicare Functional Classification Level (K-Level): 4
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Present injuries to residual limb or contralateral leg affecting functional ability
- Socket issues/changes in the last 6 weeks
- Users with bone-anchored implants
- Subjects can be excluded at the discretion of the investigator for other unforeseen disqualifying criteria (such as specific cognitive issues, etc.). Subjects in this study will not be discriminated by sex/gender or race/ethnicity.
- Using a knee that the subject is unfamiliar with may increase the risk of falling. Therefore, pregnant women should not participate in the study and will be screened by self-disclosure.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Power KneeAlso: Ossur Power Knee, Ossur Power Knee III, PK, PK3Newest version of the commercially-available Power Knee developed by Ossur. | Device | Power Knee |
Primary outcome
Daily Step Count
Time frame: 1 Month
Prior to each condition, each subject will be fit and aligned on the designated knee by a trained certified prosthetist. An activity monitor (such as the GeneActiv™) will be worn by the subject for each intervention period during the final month of the condition. Similar to prior studies, the investigators will use the activity monitor to track the number of steps the subjects take in each condition per day. The number of steps per day are averaged over the final month in each condition. A higher value indicates a better outcome.
Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC) - Measuring Change From Baseline
Time frame: At the end of each 3 month condition
Activities-specific balance confidence (ABC) scale is a structured questionnaire that measures an individual's confidence during ambulatory activities without falling or experiencing a sense of unsteadiness. It consists of 16 questions gauging the individual's confidence while doing activities, from 0 (no confidence) to 4 (complete confidence). Therefore, the total score ranges from 0 to 64, with a higher value indicating a better outcome. This survey will be given at the end of each study condition (2 conditions, 3 months per condition). This survey will be administered as a part of the master questionnaire. Analysis is reported in % of balance confidence, which is found by taking their average of all questions (sum up all questions and divide by total number of questions) and dividing that average by 4.
PEQ-Well Being (PEQ-WB) - Measuring Change From Baseline
Time frame: At the end of each 3 month condition
The version of the PEQ which will be administered consists of 2 questions in 1 category (well being). For purposes of easier administration, the investigators have adopted the modified 10-point ordinal scale version of the PEQ-WB (scale 1-10, where 1 is the worst and 10 is the best relative to the questions being asked). This survey will be given at the end of each study condition (2 conditions, 3 months per condition). This survey will be administered as a part of the master questionnaire. The reported result is the average of the 2 questions in the PEQ-WB. The range of this reported result is 1-10, where a higher value indicates a better outcome.
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Sep 2026.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
Related trials for Amputation
RecruitingObservational study
Cryo NerVe Block Extremity AmputatioN RegIStry for Post Operative and pHantom Limb Pain
Amputation, Amputation of Lower Limb
RecruitingObservational study
CNS Changes Following Upper Limb Loss
Amputation, Congenital, Upper Limb; Amelia
Recruiting
Hand Prosthesis Usability and Performance
Amputation
Recruiting
E-Socket, Diagnostic Monitoring
Trans-Tibial Amputation
RecruitingObservational study
Early Postoperative Pain Following a Limb Amputation
Amputation, Surgical, Pain Management
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Jennifer Johansson, MS principal investigator
Liberating Technologies, Inc.
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Power Knee in people with Amputation and Amputation; Traumatic, Leg, Lower, run by Liberating Technologies, Inc. at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Sep 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 26 Jun 2025). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Daily Step Count (time frame: 1 Month). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Sep 2026.