Reader response draft #1

Prosthetic leg (Ottobock)

The webpage “running prostheses” from Ottobock introduces the Ottobock 1E91 Runner prosthetic and distinguishes between its functions and features, each serving a unique purpose (Ottobock, n.d.a). 

In terms of functions, the Runner is designed for athletic performance, enabling amputees to participate in both casual jogging and competitive sports, including sprinting and long-distance running. It is built to store energy with each stride and release it efficiently for forward propulsion, optimizing both speed and endurance. Additionally, the prosthetic offers customizability, allowing adjustments tailored to the individual user’s needs based on their body type and running style (Ottobock, n.d.b).

Regarding its features, the Runner incorporates a carbon-fiber spring that provides high flexibility and energy return, boosting propulsion during running. Its lightweight design reduces the energy required for movement, making each stride more efficient. Furthermore, the prosthetic offers five degrees of freedom, enabling multi-axis movement for greater agility and more natural mobility (Ottobock, n.d.c).

Although the Ottobock prosthetic leg has high performance and customizabilty, it is a resource-intensive product as the user has to invest lots of time and money to ensure the prosthetic is in good condition.

In terms of cost, the Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) for Ottobock's 1E91 is US$6,662.00 (Ottobock, n.d). Note that 1E91 only consists of the carbon plate with a maximum lifetime of only three years for recreational runs and one year for competitive runs. The corresponding adapter and parts would have to be ordered separately, with an estimated cost of the parts and annual maintenance being US$9,574 and US$1,936 (Biddiss et al., 2011). The cost will certainly be an influential factor when deciding whether to adopt prosthesis use.

Running prosthetic legs are designed to be used during sports, therefore, users would have to often spend time switching between their daily use prosthetics and running prosthetics, which may be inconvenient. According to the "instruction for use" manual for Ottocbock's 1E91 (n.d.d), users are required to arrange regular maintenance and conduct annual safety inspections, causing them to travel to the service centre or clinic frequently. Therefore, users are expected to plan their schedules to ensure they have time to travel to their respective centres for checks and to switch between their prosthetics.

While the Ottobock prosthetic leg is resource-intensive, I believe that amputees who want to run; compete in sports; to do something they once enjoyed, will not mind the hassle of travelling to places as well as the cost to ensure their prosthetic leg is in its best condition. As quoted by Johannes Floors (German Paralympic sprinter), “You have to imagine, I wasn’t able to run properly for 16 years. Then there is someone giving you the opportunity to run; to feel wind and to feel speed. This is what I never want to lose” (International Paralympic Committee, 2018). The amputees will not just be buying a prosthetic. They are buying the experience. And of course, they are buying quality as well since it is designed for performance and customizability with its modular parts.

References:

Runner 1E91 - ottobock. (n.d.-a). https://media.ottobock.com/_web-site/prosthetics/lower-limb/running_system_3s80/files/pb-1e91_en.pdf

Ottobock Running Prostheses, Inland Empire Region (n.d.b). https://www.ottobock.com/en-ie/prosthetics/running-prostheses 

Ottobock Running Prostheses, United States Region (n.d.c). https://www.ottobock.com/en-us/prosthetics/running-prosthetics 

Ottobock 1E91 Runner, United States (n.d.d). https://shop.ottobock.us/Prosthetics/Lower-Limb-Prosthetics/Fitness-Prosthetics/1E91-Runner/p/1E91#product-documents-section

How I got into Para Athletics: Johannes Floors. International Paralympic Committee. (2018, July 13). https://www.paralympic.org/news/how-i-got-para-athletics-johannes-floors

Biddiss, E., McKeever, P., Lindsay, S., & Chau, T. (2011). Implications of prosthesis funding structures on the use of prostheses. Prosthetics & Orthotics International, 35(2), 215–224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364611401776 


 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Self-introduction letter to Professor Blackstone

Summary draft and thesis

Interpretation of quote