The SmartIP microprocessor controlled knee employs intelligent programming technology that dynamically programs the knee to optimum swing settings for the individual Level 3 activity user, reducing the amount of energy expended by trans-femoral prosthesis users. The weight activated stance control provides an adjustable smooth and yielding transition at toe off.
Improvements in Clinical Outcomes using prosthetic knees with microprocessor-controlled swing phase
1. | Heller BW, Datta D, Howitt J. A pilot study comparing the cognitive demand of walking for transfemoral amputees using the Intelligent Prosthesis with that using conventionally damped knees. Clin Rehabil 2000; 14: 518–522. | |
2. | Chin T, Maeda Y, Sawamura S, et al. Successful prosthetic fitting of elderly trans-femoral amputees with Intelligent Prosthesis (IP): a clinical pilot study. Prosthet Orthot Int 2007; 31: 271–276. | |
3. | Datta D, Heller B, Howitt J. A comparative evaluation of oxygen consumption and gait pattern in amputees using Intelligent Prostheses and conventionally damped knee swing-phase control. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19: 398–403. | |
4. | Datta D, Howitt J. Conventional versus microchip controlled pneumatic swing phase control for trans-femoral amputees: user’s verdict. Prosthet Orthot Int 1998; 22: 129–135. | |
5. | Buckley JG, Spence WD, Solomonidis SE. Energy cost of walking: comparison of “intelligent prosthesis” with conventional mechanism. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997; 78: 330–333. | |
6. | Kirker S, Keymer S, Talbot J, et al. An assessment of the intelligent knee prosthesis. Clin Rehabil 1996; 10: 267–273. | |
7. | Chin T, Sawamura S, Shiba R, et al. Energy expenditure during walking in amputees after disarticulation of the hip: a microprocessor-controlled swing-phase control knee versus a mechanical-controlled stance-phase control knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 117–119. | |
8. | Taylor MB, Clark E, Offord EA, et al. A comparison of energy expenditure by a high level trans-femoral amputee using the Intelligent Prosthesis and conventionally damped prosthetic limbs. Prosthet Orthot Int 1996; 20: 116–121. | |
9. | Chin T, Machida K, Sawamura S, et al. Comparison of different microprocessor controlled knee joints on the energy consumption during walking in trans-femoral amputees: intelligent knee prosthesis (IP) versus C-leg. Prosthet Orthot Int 2006; 30: 73–80. | |
10. | Chin T, Sawamura S, Shiba R, et al. Effect of an Intelligent Prosthesis (IP) on the walking ability of young transfemoral amputees: comparison of IP users with able-bodied people. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2003; 82: 447–451. |
See all the Clinical Evidence for every Blatchford product in our Clinical Evidence Finder Tool.
Max. User Weight:
125kg
275lb
Activity Level:
3
Component Weight:
Build Height:
Control Unit:
*Maximum user weight 100kg
Socket Adapters
Part Numbers:
Stanceflex options:
SMARTIPSF30
SMARTIPSFPYR
4-Bolt options:
SMARTIP4B30
SMARTIP4BPYR
Click here for Technical Information (Instructions for Use) »