Subjects also needed to be able to tolerate IRC and brimless sockets as defined by the study protocol.
Randomization would not have been possible with a single cast followed by an initial IRC socket fitting and eventual brim removal to create the brimless design.
Three subjects wore a Symmetry liner brimless socket prior to this clinical trial.
The medial wall on the brimless design was a mean of 3.
The peak/stance average pressure in the medial proximal aspect of the socket was 322 [+ or -] 210 mmHg (range: 157-868 mmHg) in the IRC, compared with 190 [+ or -] 103 mmHg (range: 53-347 mmHg) in the brimless condition; this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.
All subjects preferred the brimless socket to the IRC.
In this sample, the brimless design was essentially equivalent to the IRC in most outcome measures, except for medial proximal skin pressure.
Compared with passive conventional options, a dynamic suspension method that increases the surface area  for VAS and total-contact weight bearing likely contributed to the ability to successfully fit this sample of TFAs with brimless VAS sockets.
The single greatest peak pressure increased in the brimless sockets in the distal and distal-lateral femur areas, but not significantly.
We observed mean pressures of 322 mmHg in the IRC, compared with 190 mmHg in the brimless design.
All subjects in this study preferred the brimless socket in the short-term.