Page 539 - IJB-10-3

International Journal of Bioprinting Mechanical responses of 3D-printed AFO

26. Aboutorabi A, Arazpour M, Ahmadi Bani M, Saeedi H, fiber reinforced ankle-foot orthosis. Med Eng Phys.
Head JS. Efficacy of ankle foot orthoses types on walking in 2015;37(5):505-511.
children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Ann Phys doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.02.002
Rehabil Med. 2017;60(6):393-402. 36. Schrank ES, Hitch L, Wallace K, Moore R, Stanhope SJ.
doi: 10.1016/j.rehab.2017.05.004
Assessment of a virtual functional prototyping process
27. Sumiya T, Suzuki Y, Kasahara T. Stiffness control in for the rapid manufacture of passive-dynamic ankle-foot
posterior-type plastic ankle-foot orthoses: effect of ankle orthoses. J Biomech Eng. 2013;135(10):101011-101017.
trimline. Part 2: orthosis characteristics and orthosis/patient doi: 10.1115/1.4024825
matching. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1996;20(2):132-137.
doi: 10.3109/03093649609164431 37. Syngellakis S, Arnold MA, Rassoulian H. Assessment of
the non-linear behaviour of plastic ankle foot orthoses
28. Bielby SA, Warrick TJ, Benson D, et al. Trimline severity by the finite element method. Proc Inst Mech Eng H.
significantly affects rotational stiffness of ankle-foot orthosis. 2000;214(5):527-539.
J Prosthet Orthot. 2010;22(4):204-210. doi: 10.1243/0954411001535561
doi: 10.1097/JPO.0b013e3181f9082e
38. Ielapi A, Lammens N, Van Paepegem W, et al. A validated
29. Shuman BR, Totah D, Gates DH, Gao F, Ries AJ, Russell computational framework to evaluate the stiffness of 3D
Esposito E. Comparison of five different methodologies for printed ankle foot orthoses. Comput Methods Biomech
evaluating ankle-foot orthosis stiffness. J Neuroeng Rehabil. Biomed Engin. 2019;22(8):880-887.
2023;20(1):11. doi: 10.1080/10255842.2019.1601712
doi: 10.1186/s12984-023-01126-7
39. Abdalsadah FH, Hasan F, Murtaza Q, Khan AA. Design
30. Ielapi A, Forward M, De Beule M. Computational and and manufacture of a custom ankle–foot orthoses using
experimental evaluation of the mechanical properties of traditional manufacturing and fused deposition modeling.
ankle foot orthoses: a literature review. Prosthet Orthot Int. Prog Addit Manuf. 2021;6(3):555-570.
2019;43(3):339-348. doi: 10.1007/s40964-021-00178-2
doi: 10.1177/0309364618824452
40. Sumihira W, Otani T, Kobayashi Y, Tanaka M. Computational
31. Bregman DJ, Rozumalski A, Koops D, de Groot V, Schwartz modelling of ankle-foot orthosis to evaluate spatially
M, Harlaar J. A new method for evaluating ankle foot orthosis asymmetric structural stiffness: importance of geometric
characteristics: BRUCE. Gait Posture. 2009;30(2):144-149. nonlinearity. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2022;236(9):1357-1364.
doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.05.012 doi: 10.1177/09544119221114199
32. Shuman BR, Russell Esposito E. Multiplanar stiffness 41. Eddison N, Mulholland M, Chockalingam N. Do research
of commercial carbon composite ankle-foot orthoses. papers provide enough information on design and material
J Biomech Eng. 2022;144(1). used in ankle foot orthoses for children with cerebral
doi: 10.1115/1.4051845 palsy? A systematic review. J Child Orthop. 2017;11(4):
33. Totah D, Menon M, Gates DH, Barton K. Design and 263-271.
evaluation of the SMApp: a stiffness measurement apparatus doi: 10.1302/1863-2548.11.160256
for ankle–foot orthoses. Mechatronics. 2021;77. 42. ASTM International. Standard Test Method for Tensile
doi: 10.1016/j.mechatronics.2021.102572 Properties of Plastics. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM
34. Zou D, He T, Dailey M, et al. Experimental and computational International; 2014.
analysis of composite ankle-foot orthosis. J Rehabil Res Dev. doi: 10.1520/D0638-14
2014;51(10):1525-1536. 43. Wickramasinghe S, Peng C, Ladani R, Tran P. Analysing
doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2014-02-0046
fracture properties of bio-inspired 3D printed suture
35. Stier B, Simon JW, Reese S. Numerical and experimental structures. Thin Wall Struct. 2022;176:109317.
investigation of the structural behavior of a carbon doi: 10.1016/j.tws.2022.109317

Volume 10 Issue 3 (2024) 531 doi: 10.36922/ijb.3390