Effect of vacuum-assisted socket and pin suspensions on socket fit

Patients with unilateral transfemoral amputation treated with a percutaneous osseointegrated prosthesis: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of treatment with an osseointegrated percutaneous (OI-) prosthesis and a socket-suspended (S-) prosthesis for patients with a transfemoral amputation.

Patients and Methods

A Markov model was developed to estimate the medical costs and changes in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) attributable to treatment of unilateral transfemoral amputation over a projected period of 20 years from a healthcare perspective. Data were collected alongside a prospective clinical study of 51 patients followed for two years.

Results

OI-prostheses had an incremental cost per QALY gained of €83 374 compared with S-prostheses. The clinical improvement seen with OI-prostheses was reflected in QALYs gained. Results were most sensitive to the utility value for both treatment arms. The impact of an annual decline in utility values of 1%, 2%, and 3%, for patients with S-prostheses resulted in a cost per QALY gained of €37 020, €24 662, and €18 952, respectively, over 20 years.

Conclusion

From a healthcare perspective, treatment with an OI-prosthesis results in improved quality of life at a relatively high cost compared with that for S-prosthesis. When patients treated with S-prostheses had a decline in quality of life over time, the cost per QALY gained by OI-prosthesis treatment was considerably reduced. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:527-34.

Standardized Approach to Quantitatively Measure Residual Limb Skin Health in Individuals with Lower Limb Amputation

Objective: (1) Develop a standardized approach to quantitatively measure residual limb skin health. (2) Report reference residual limb skin health values in people with transtibial and transfemoral amputation. Approach: Residual limb health outcomes in individuals with transtibial (n = 5) and transfemoral (n = 5) amputation were compared to able-limb controls (n = 4) using noninvasive imaging (hyperspectral imaging and laser speckle flowmetry) and probe-based approaches (laser doppler flowmetry, transcutaneous oxygen, transepidermal water loss, surface electrical capacitance). Results: A standardized methodology that employs noninvasive imaging and probe-based approaches to measure residual limb skin health are described. Compared to able-limb controls, individuals with transtibial and transfemoral amputation have significantly lower transcutaneous oxygen tension, higher transepidermal water loss, and higher surface electrical capacitance in the residual limb. Innovation: Residual limb health as a critical component of prosthesis rehabilitation for individuals with lower limb amputation is understudied in part due to a lack of clinical measures. Here, we present a standardized approach to measure residual limb health in people with transtibial and transfemoral amputation. Conclusion: Technology advances in noninvasive imaging and probe-based measures are leveraged to develop a standardized approach to quantitatively measure residual limb health in individuals with lower limb loss. Compared to able-limb controls, resting residual limb physiology in people that have had transfemoral or transtibial amputation is characterized by lower transcutaneous oxygen tension and poorer skin barrier function.