BladeXT is the complete solution for active users. It is suitable for everyday use as well as running, cycling and other sporting activities, too. It has been designed so that wearers don’t have to stop and change their prostheses between activities throughout the day.
BladeXT is lightweight, flexible and responsive, yet durable. It delivers outstanding performance, ground compliance, comfort and postural support from the twin toe spring and traction heel, while its C-shaped toe spring is primed for optimal energy response. The result is a sports blade that offers the user versatility, security and the confidence to enjoy an active life.
- Activity level 4
- Submersion to a depth of 1m
BladeXT Clinical Evidence Reference
Clinical Outcomes using e-carbon feet
- High mean radius of curvature for Esprit-style e-carbon feet2: “The larger the radius of curvature, the more stable is the foot”
- Allow variable running speeds3
- Increased self-selected walking speed4
- Elite-style e-carbon feet (L code VL5987) or VT units demonstrate the second highest mobility levels, behind only microprocessor feet5
- Users demonstrate confidence in prosthetic loading during high activity6
- Improved prosthetic push-off work compared to SACH feet7
- Increased prosthetic positive work done4
- High degree of user satisfaction, particularly with high activity users8
Full Reference Listing
Crimin A, McGarry A, Harris EJ, et al.
The effect that energy storage and return feet have on the propulsion of the body: A pilot study. Proc Inst Mech Eng [H] 2014; 228: 908–915.
Curtze C, Hof AL, van Keeken HG, et al.
Comparative roll-over analysis of prosthetic feet. J Biomech 2009; 42: 1746–1753.
Strike SC, Arcone D, Orendurff M.
Running at submaximal speeds, the role of the intact and prosthetic limbs for trans-tibial amputees. Gait Posture 2018; 62: 327–332.
Ray SF, Wurdeman SR, Takahashi KZ.
Prosthetic energy return during walking increases after 3 weeks of adaptation to a new device. J Neuroengineering Rehabil 2018; 15: 6.
Wurdeman SR, Stevens PM, Campbell JH.
Mobility analysis of AmpuTees (MAAT 5): Impact of five common prosthetic ankle-foot categories for individuals with diabetic/dysvascular amputation. J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng 2019; 6: 2055668318820784.
Haber CK, Ritchie LJ, Strike SC.
Dynamic elastic response prostheses alter approach angles and ground reaction forces but not leg stiffness during a start-stop task. Hum Mov Sci 2018; 58: 337–346.
Rock CG, Wurdeman SR, Stergiou N, Takahashi KZ.
Stride-to-stride fluctuations in transtibial amputees are not affected by changes in push-off mechanics from using different prostheses. PloS one. 2018;13(10).
Highsmith MJ, Kahle JT, Miro RM, et al.
Differences in Military Obstacle Course Performance Between Three Energy-Storing and Shock-Adapting Prosthetic Feet in High-Functioning Transtibial Amputees: A Double-Blind, Randomized Control Trial. Mil Med 2016; 181: 45–54.