Elan is a microprocessor controlled foot that mimics natural muscle resistance and ankle motion by adapting hydraulic resistance levels to optimise stability when standing and walking, on slopes and uneven terrain. This encourages more symmetrical limb loading, faster walking speed and reduced compensatory movements. The ankle pivot point is optimally positioned close to the natural weight line for a more natural response through the gait cycle. The result is smoother, safer and more natural walking, helping to preserve the body for the long term.
When no movement is sensed, the hydraulics stiffen to assist with a natural standing posture, providing equal socket pressures.
The refreshed design incorporates an integrated charging connector with a new LED battery power indicator.
The new software interface has been simplified and refined so that it is now easier than ever for clinicians to set up Elan.
The battery life is now even longer with up to two days usage between charges and a low power mode.
On walking downhill, lower plantarflexion resistance allows the foot to fully contact the slope sooner for improved safety and security. At the same time, increased dorsflexion resistance provides a braking effect stabilising the user for a safer, more controlled descent
When walking quickly or up slopes, the plantarflexion resistance increases allowing for more optimal energy storage and return. Combined with a softer dorsflexion resistance, this aids forward momentum, body position and minimises the effort required to walk fast or uphill.
Standing for longer periods has also just got easier. A network of sensors detect the user is stationary, increasing resistance to help improve balance, stability reduce effort and encourage a more natural posture.
During swing phase, the ankle remains in a dorsiflexed position increasing toe clearance on every step and reducing the risk of stumbles or falls
Blatchford Biomimetic Hydraulic Technology mimics the dynamic and adaptive qualities of muscle actuation to encourage more natural gait. Multiple independent scientific studies, comparing Blatchford hydraulic ankle-feet to non-hydraulic feet, have shown:
Over a decade after challenging conventional wisdom, new scientific evidence continues to be published on the medical advantages of hydraulic ankles. Discover our White Paper ‘A Study of Hydraulic Ankles’.
Hydraulic ankles, provide an alternative to this conventional design, creating a more biomimetic model. This design still incorporates ‘heel’ and ‘toe’ springs, but rather than a rigid ‘ankle’, there is a joint.
Hydraulic damping is used to influence the movement of this joint, producing a viscoelastic property closer to the behaviour of human muscle.
DownloadImprovements in Clinical Outcomes using Elan compared to ESR feet
Reduced risk of tripping and falls
Improved knee stability on the prosthetic side during slope descent
Improving standing balance on a slope
Reduced energy expenditure during walking
Improved gait performance
Improved ground compliance when walking on slopes
Less of a prosthetic “dead spot” during gait
Improved ground compliance when walking on slopes
Less effort on residual hip for trans-femoral amputees on varied terrains
Effects consistent over time
Brake mode during slope descent to control momentum build up
Less gait compensation movements during slope descent
Helps protect vulnerable limb tissue, reducing likelihood of damage
Greater contribution of prosthetic limb to support during walking
Reduced reliance on sound limb for support during walking
Better symmetry of loading between prosthetic and sound limbs during standing on a slope
Reduced residual and sound joint moments during standing of a slope
Reduced residual joint moments during standing of a slope for bilateral amputees
Less pressure on the sole of the contralateral foot
Improved gait symmetry
Patient reported outcome measures indicate improvements
Subjective user preference for hydraulic ankle
Improvements in Clinical Outcomes using Elan compared to non-microprocessor-control hydraulic ankle-feet
Improved knee stability on the prosthetic side during slope descent
Improved ground compliance when walking down slopes
Brake mode during slope descent increases resistance to dorsiflexion to control momentum build up
Assist mode during slope ascent decreases resistance to dorsiflexion to allow easier progression
Less gait compensation movements during slope descent
Greater reliance on prosthetic side for bodyweight support during slope descent
Less reliance on sound side for bodyweight support during slope descent
Less reliance on sound side for bodyweight support during slope ascent
Reduced sound joint moments during standing of a slope
Reduced residual joint moments during standing of a slope for bilateral amputees
Riveras M, Ravera E, Ewins D, Shaheen AF, Catalfamo-Formento P.
Minimum toe clearance and tripping probability in people with unilateral transtibial amputation walking on ramps with different prosthetic designs. Gait & Posture. 2020 Sep 1;81:41-8.
Johnson L, De Asha AR, Munjal R, et al.
Toe clearance when walking in people with unilateral transtibial amputation: effects of passive hydraulic ankle. J Rehabil Res Dev 2014; 51: 429.
Bai X, Ewins D, Crocombe AD, et al.
A biomechanical assessment of hydraulic ankle-foot devices with and without micro-processor control during slope ambulation in trans-femoral amputees. PLOS ONE 2018; 13: e0205093.
McGrath M, Laszczak P, Zahedi S, et al.
Microprocessor knees with “standing support” and articulating, hydraulic ankles improve balance control and inter-limb loading during quiet standing. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng 2018; 5: 2055668318795396.
Askew GN, McFarlane LA, Minetti AE, et al.
Energy cost of ambulation in trans-tibial amputees using a dynamic-response foot with hydraulic versus rigid ‘ankle’: insights from body centre of mass dynamics. J NeuroEngineering Rehabil 2019; 16: 39.
De Asha AR, Barnett CT, Struchkov V, et al.
Which Prosthetic Foot to Prescribe?: Biomechanical Differences Found during a Single-Session Comparison of Different Foot Types Hold True 1 Year Later. JPO J Prosthet Orthot 2017; 29: 39–43.
De Asha AR, Munjal R, Kulkarni J, et al.
Impact on the biomechanics of overground gait of using an ‘Echelon’hydraulic ankle–foot device in unilateral trans-tibial and trans-femoral amputees. Clin Biomech 2014; 29: 728–734.
De Asha AR, Munjal R, Kulkarni J, et al.
Walking speed related joint kinetic alterations in trans-tibial amputees: impact of hydraulic’ankle’damping. J Neuroengineering Rehabil 2013; 10: 1.
De Asha AR, Johnson L, Munjal R, et al.
Attenuation of centre-of-pressure trajectory fluctuations under the prosthetic foot when using an articulating hydraulic ankle attachment compared to fixed attachment. Clin Biomech 2013; 28: 218–224.
Bai X, Ewins D, Crocombe AD, et al.
Kinematic and biomimetic assessment of a hydraulic ankle/foot in level ground and camber walking. PLOS ONE 2017; 12: e0180836.
Alexander N, Strutzenberger G, Kroell J, et al.
Joint Moments During Downhill and Uphill Walking of a Person with Transfemoral Amputation with a Hydraulic Articulating and a Rigid Prosthetic Ankle—A Case Study. JPO J Prosthet Orthot 2018; 30: 46–54.
Struchkov V, Buckley JG.
Biomechanics of ramp descent in unilateral trans-tibial amputees: Comparison of a microprocessor controlled foot with conventional ankle–foot mechanisms. Clin Biomech 2016; 32: 164–170.
Portnoy S, Kristal A, Gefen A, et al.
Outdoor dynamic subject-specific evaluation of internal stresses in the residual limb: hydraulic energy-stored prosthetic foot compared to conventional energy-stored prosthetic feet. Gait Posture 2012; 35: 121–125.
McGrath M, Davies KC, Laszczak P, et al.
The influence of hydraulic ankles and microprocessor-control on the biomechanics of trans-tibial amputees during quiet standing on a 5° slope. Can Prosthet Orthot J; 2.
Moore R.
Effect of a Prosthetic Foot with a Hydraulic Ankle Unit on the Contralateral Foot Peak Plantar Pressures in Individuals with Unilateral Amputation. JPO J Prosthet Orthot 2018; 30: 165–70.
Moore R.
Effect on Stance Phase Timing Asymmetry in Individuals with Amputation Using Hydraulic Ankle Units. JPO J Prosthet Orthot 2016; 28: 44–48.
Sedki I, Moore R.
Patient evaluation of the Echelon foot using the Seattle Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire. Prosthet Orthot Int 2013; 37: 250–254.
McGrath M, Laszczak P, Zahedi S, et al.
The influence of a microprocessor-controlled hydraulic ankle on the kinetic symmetry of trans-tibial amputees during ramp walking: a case series. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng 2018; 5: 2055668318790650.
The PDAC-Approved badge denotes a product that has been approved by the Pricing, Data Analysis and Coding (PDAC) contractor for one or more of the prior authorization codes as specified in the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) codes.
