Literature DB >> 14727700

Development and measurement properties of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS): a comprehensive set of clinical outcome instruments.

A W Heinemann1, R K Bode, C O'Reilly.   

Abstract

The need to measure and evaluate orthotics and prosthetics (O&P) practice has received growing recognition in the past several years. Reliable and valid self-report instruments are needed that can help facilities evaluate patient outcomes. The objective of this project was to develop a set of self-report instruments that assess functional status, quality of life, and satisfaction with devices and services that can be used in an orthotics and prosthetics clinic. Selecting items from a variety of existing instruments, the authors developed and revised four instruments that differentiate patients with varying levels of lower limb function, quality of life, and satisfaction with devices and services. Evidence of construct validity is provided by hierarchies of item difficulty that are consistent with clinical experience. For example, with the lower limb function instrument, running one block was much more difficult than walking indoors. The instruments demonstrate adequate internal consistency (0.88 for lower limb function, 0.88 for quality of life, 0.74 for service satisfaction, 0.78 for device satisfaction). The next steps in their research programme are to evaluate sensitivity and construct validity. The Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS) is a promising self-report instrument which may, with further development, allow orthotic and prosthetic practitioners to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of their services as required by accreditation standards such as those of the American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics that mandate quality assessment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14727700     DOI: 10.1080/03093640308726682

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int        ISSN: 0309-3646            Impact factor:   1.895


  34 in total

Review 1.  How a diverse research ecosystem has generated new rehabilitation technologies: Review of NIDILRR's Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers.

Authors:  David J Reinkensmeyer; Sarah Blackstone; Cathy Bodine; John Brabyn; David Brienza; Kevin Caves; Frank DeRuyter; Edmund Durfee; Stefania Fatone; Geoff Fernie; Steven Gard; Patricia Karg; Todd A Kuiken; Gerald F Harris; Mike Jones; Yue Li; Jordana Maisel; Michael McCue; Michelle A Meade; Helena Mitchell; Tracy L Mitzner; James L Patton; Philip S Requejo; James H Rimmer; Wendy A Rogers; W Zev Rymer; Jon A Sanford; Lawrence Schneider; Levin Sliker; Stephen Sprigle; Aaron Steinfeld; Edward Steinfeld; Gregg Vanderheiden; Carolee Winstein; Li-Qun Zhang; Thomas Corfman
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 4.262

Review 2.  Artificial referred sensation in upper and lower limb prosthesis users: a systematic review.

Authors:  Michael Gonzalez; Alex Bismuth; Christina Lee; Cynthia A Chestek; Deanna H Gates
Journal:  J Neural Eng       Date:  2022-09-08       Impact factor: 5.043

3.  Benefits of the Cybathlon 2020 experience for a prosthetic hand user: a case study on the Hannes system.

Authors:  Giulia Caserta; Nicolò Boccardo; Marco Freddolini; Giacinto Barresi; Andrea Marinelli; Michele Canepa; Samuel Stedman; Lorenzo Lombardi; Matteo Laffranchi; Emanuele Gruppioni; Lorenzo De Michieli
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2022-07-04       Impact factor: 5.208

4.  Test-retest reliability of the Arabic translation of the Lower Extremity Functional Status of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey.

Authors:  Ahmed Alhowimel; Faris Alodaibi; Khalid Al-Nowaisri; Mazyad Alotaibi; Haitham Ghazal
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2021-12-14       Impact factor: 1.672

5.  Test-Retest Reliability of Dynamic Balance Performance-Based Measures Among Adults With a Unilateral Lower-Limb Amputation.

Authors:  Jefferson R Cardoso; Emma H Beisheim; John R Horne; J Megan Sions
Journal:  PM R       Date:  2019-03-07       Impact factor: 2.298

Review 6.  Neuroprosthetics and the science of patient input.

Authors:  Heather L Benz; Eugene F Civillico
Journal:  Exp Neurol       Date:  2016-07-22       Impact factor: 5.330

7.  Amputation Care Quality and Satisfaction With Prosthetic Limb Services: A Longitudinal Study of Veterans With Upper Limb Amputation.

Authors:  Linda Resnik; Matthew Borgia; Sarah Ekerholm; M Jason Highsmith; Billie Jane Randolph; Joseph Webster; Melissa A Clark
Journal:  Fed Pract       Date:  2021-03

8.  Comparative study between Dermo, Pelite, and Seal-In X5 liners: effect on patient's satisfaction and perceived problems.

Authors:  Sadeeq Ali; Noor Azuan Abu Osman; Nooranida Arifin; Hossein Gholizadeh; Nasrul Anwar Abd Razak; Wan Abu Bakar Wan Abas
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2014-08-11

9.  Satisfaction with ankle foot orthoses in individuals with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease.

Authors:  Riccardo Zuccarino; Kirsten M Anderson; Michael E Shy; Jason M Wilken
Journal:  Muscle Nerve       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 3.217

10.  Monitoring functional capability of individuals with lower limb amputations using mobile phones.

Authors:  Mark V Albert; Cliodhna McCarthy; Juliana Valentin; Megan Herrmann; Konrad Kording; Arun Jayaraman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-04       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.