Prosthesis donning and doffing questionnaire: Development and validation

Recommendations from the ISPO lower-limb COMPASS: Patient-reported and performance-based outcome measures

BACKGROUND

Outcome measures (patient-reported and performance-based) are used widely but not uniformly within the clinical setting for individuals with lower-limb absence (LLA). The need for more detailed information by funding bodies, service planners and providers, and researchers requires the systematic and routine use of outcome measures. Currently, there is no consensus on which outcome measure(s) should be used for individuals with LLA. The aim of the International Society of Prosthetics and Orthotics (ISPO) lower-limb Consensus Outcome Measures for Prosthetic and Amputation Services (COMPASS) was to produce a recommended list of outcome measures to be actively promoted for routine use within clinical practice before and after an episode of care.

METHODS

Between May and June 2021, 46 users, clinicians, researchers, managers, and policymakers working in the field of LLA and prosthetic users met virtually. Consensus participants were first asked to complete an online survey with questions based on the results from a systematic review and the outcomes from an expert panel. A modified Delphi technique was used to determine outcome measures for use in routine clinical practice. This paper discusses the ISPO lower-limb COMPASS process from which recommendations were made.

RESULTS

The ISPO lower-limb COMPASS resulted in the following 6 recommendations: (1) Amputee Mobility Predictor, Timed Up and Go, Two-Minute Walk Test, Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire-Residual Limb Health, Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire-Utility, and Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales-Revised, which make up the ISPO lower-limb COMPASS ; (2) Comprehensive High-Level Activity Mobility Predictor and Six-Minute Walk Test are 2 additional outcome measures recommended for higher-activity-level individuals with LLA, which make up the COMPASS+ ; (3) Patient-Specific Function Scale makes up the COMPASS Adjunct ; (4) a generic health-related quality of life outcome measure such as the European Quality of Life-5D-5L or Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 item can be used to supplement the COMPASS; (5) outcome measures suited to low- and middle-income countries need to be developed with a focus on activities such as sitting cross-legged, kneeling, squatting, and other culturally important mobility-related activities; and (6) translation, validation, and open sharing of translated outcome measures included in the COMPASS, COMPASS+, and COMPASS Adjunct occurs.

CONCLUSION

The above recommendations represent the current status of knowledge on outcome measures for LLA based on research and international consensus and hence, will change over time. This work has been developed for clinicians and researchers to improve knowledge on outcome measures to guide clinical decision-making and future research initiatives.

Survey of transfemoral amputee experience and priorities for the user-centered design of powered robotic transfemoral prostheses

BACKGROUND

Transfemoral amputees experience a complex host of physical, psychological, and social challenges, compounded by the functional limitations of current transfemoral prostheses. However, the specific relationships between human factors and prosthesis design and performance characteristics have not yet been adequately investigated. The present study aims to address this knowledge gap.

METHODS

A comprehensive single-cohort survey of 114 unilateral transfemoral amputees addressed a broad range of demographic and clinical characteristics, functional autonomy, satisfaction and attitudes towards their current prostheses, and design priorities for an ideal transfemoral prosthesis, including the possibility of active assistance from a robotic knee unit. The survey was custom-developed based on several standard questionnaires used to assess motor abilities and autonomy in activities of daily living, prosthesis satisfaction, and quality of life in lower-limb amputees. Survey data were analyzed to compare the experience (including autonomy and satisfaction) and design priorities of users of transfemoral prostheses with versus without microprocessor-controlled knee units (MPKs and NMPKs, respectively), with a subsequent analyses of cross-category correlation, principal component analysis (PCA), cost-sensitivity segmentation, and unsupervised K-means clustering applied within the most cost-sensitive participants, to identify functional groupings of users with respect to their design priorities.

RESULTS

The cohort featured predominantly younger (< 50 years) traumatic male amputees with respect to the general transfemoral amputee population, with pronounced differences in age distribution and amputation etiology (traumatic vs. non-traumatic) between MPK and NMPK groups. These differences were further reflected in user experience, with MPK users reporting significantly greater overall functional autonomy, satisfaction, and sense of prosthesis ownership than those with NMPKs, in conjunction with a decreased incidence of instability and falls. Across all participants, the leading functional priorities for an ideal transfemoral prosthesis were overall stability, adaptability to variable walking velocity, and lifestyle-related functionality, while the highest-prioritized general characteristics were reliability, comfort, and weight, with highly variable prioritization of cost according to reimbursement status. PCA and user clustering analyses revealed the possibility for functionally relevant groupings of prosthesis features and users, based on their differential prioritization of these features-with implications towards prosthesis design tradeoffs.

CONCLUSIONS

This study's findings support the understanding that when appropriately prescribed according to patient characteristics and needs in the context of a proactive rehabilitation program, advanced transfemoral prostheses promote patient mobility, autonomy, and overall health. Survey data indicate overall stability, modularity, and versatility as key design priorities for the continued development of transfemoral prosthesis technology. Finally, observed associations between prosthesis type, user experience, and attitudes concerning prosthesis ownership suggest both that prosthesis characteristics influence device acceptance and functional outcomes, and that psychosocial factors should be specifically and proactively addressed during the rehabilitation process.

Evaluation Tools for Assistive Technologies: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Assistive technologies (ATs) support independence and well-being in people with cognitive, perceptual, and physical limitations. Given the increasing availability and diversity of ATs, evaluating the usefulness of current and emerging ATs is crucial for informed comparison. We aimed to chart the landscape and development of AT evaluation tools (ETs; ATETs) across disparate fields in order to improve the process of AT evaluation and development.

DATA SOURCES

We performed a scoping review of ATETs through database searching of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, HaPI, PsycINFO, Cochrane Reviews, and Compendex as well as citation mining.

STUDY SELECTION

Articles explicitly referencing ATETs were retained for screening. We included ETs if they were designed to specifically evaluate ATs.

DATA EXTRACTION

We extracted 5 attributes of ATETs: AT category, construct evaluated, conceptual frameworks, type of end user input used for ATET development, and presence of validity testing.

DATA SYNTHESIS

From screening 23,434 records, we included 159 ATETs. Specificity of tools ranged from single to general ATs across 40 AT categories. Satisfaction, functional performance, and usage were the most common constructs of 103 identified. We identified 34 conceptual frameworks across 53 ETs. Finally, 36% incorporated end user input and 80% showed validation testing.

CONCLUSIONS

We characterized a wide range of AT categories with diverse approaches to their evaluation based on varied conceptual frameworks. Combining these frameworks in future ATETs may provide more holistic views of AT usefulness. ATET selection may be improved with guidelines for conceptually reconciling results of disparate ATETs. Future ATET development may benefit from more integrated approaches to end user engagement.