Literature DB >> 25944625

Characterizing mobility from the prosthetic limb user's perspective: Use of focus groups to guide development of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility.

Brian J Hafner1, Sara J Morgan2, Daniel C Abrahamson3, Dagmar Amtmann2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Input from target respondents in the development of patient-reported outcome measures is necessary to ensure that the instrument is meaningful.
OBJECTIVES: To solicit perspectives of prosthetic limb users about their mobility experiences and to inform development of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility. STUDY
DESIGN: Qualitative study.
METHODS: Four focus groups of lower limb prosthesis users were held in different regions of the United States. Focus group transcripts were coded, and themes were identified. Feedback from participants was used to develop a framework for measuring mobility with a lower limb prosthesis.
RESULTS: Focus group participants (N = 37) described mobility as a confluence of factors that included characteristics of the individual, activity, and environment. Identified themes were defined as individual characteristics, forms of movement, and environmental situations. Prosthetic mobility was conceptualized as movement activities performed in an environmental or situational context.
CONCLUSION: Respondent feedback used to guide development of Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility established a foundation for a new person-centered measure of mobility with a prosthetic limb. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Perspectives of target respondents are needed to guide development of instruments intended to measure health outcomes. Focus groups of prosthetic limb users were conducted to solicit experiences related to mobility with a lower limb prosthesis. Results were used to inform development of a clinically meaningful, person-centered instrument. © The International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics 2015.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Focus groups; artificial limb; mobility limitations; qualitative research

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25944625      PMCID: PMC4635102          DOI: 10.1177/0309364615579315

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


  24 in total

1.  Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1--eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument.

Authors:  Donald L Patrick; Laurie B Burke; Chad J Gwaltney; Nancy Kline Leidy; Mona L Martin; Elizabeth Molsen; Lena Ring
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2011-10-13       Impact factor: 5.725

2.  The PROMIS initiative: involvement of rehabilitation stakeholders in development and examples of applications in rehabilitation research.

Authors:  Dagmar Amtmann; Karon F Cook; Kurt L Johnson; David Cella
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 3.966

3.  Court reporters: a viable solution for the challenges of focus group data collection?

Authors:  Shannon D Scott; Heather Sharpe; Kathy O'Leary; Ulrike Dehaeck; Kathryn Hindmarsh; John Garry Moore; Martin H Osmond
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2009-01

Review 4.  The experience of amputation and prosthesis use for adults: a metasynthesis.

Authors:  Craig D Murray; Mark J Forshaw
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil       Date:  2012-10-04       Impact factor: 3.033

5.  Patient information on phantom limb pain: a focus group study of patient experiences, perceptions and opinions.

Authors:  C M Mortimer; W M Steedman; I R McMillan; D J Martin; J Ravey
Journal:  Health Educ Res       Date:  2002-06

6.  PRO development: rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation.

Authors:  Kathryn Eilene Lasch; Patrick Marquis; Marc Vigneux; Linda Abetz; Benoit Arnould; Martha Bayliss; Bruce Crawford; Kathleen Rosa
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2010-05-30       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  From satisfaction to expectation: the patient's perspective in lower limb prosthetic care.

Authors:  Harmen Van der Linde; Cheriel J Hofstad; Jan H B Geertzen; Klaas Postema; Jacques Van Limbeek
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil       Date:  2007-07-15       Impact factor: 3.033

8.  Lower-limb amputee needs assessment using multistakeholder focus-group approach.

Authors:  Glenn K Klute; Carole Kantor; Chris Darrouzet; Helga Wild; Susann Wilkinson; Suzana Iveljic; Graham Creasey
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2009

9.  Communicating about the experience of pain and fatigue in disability.

Authors:  Kathryn M Yorkston; Kurt Johnson; Erin Boesflug; Joe Skala; Dagmar Amtmann
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 10.  Interviewing to develop Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) measures for clinical research: eliciting patients' experience.

Authors:  Anne Brédart; Alexia Marrel; Linda Abetz-Webb; Kathy Lasch; Catherine Acquadro
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2014-02-05       Impact factor: 3.186

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Osseointegrated Prosthetic Limb for the treatment of lower limb amputations : Experience and outcomes.

Authors:  Munjed Al Muderis; William Lu; Jiao Jiao Li
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 1.000

2.  Construct Validity of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M) in Adults With Lower Limb Amputation.

Authors:  Brian J Hafner; Ignacio A Gaunaurd; Sara J Morgan; Dagmar Amtmann; Rana Salem; Robert S Gailey
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2016-08-30       Impact factor: 3.966

3.  OASIS 1: Retrospective analysis of four different microprocessor knee types.

Authors:  James H Campbell; Phillip M Stevens; Shane R Wurdeman
Journal:  J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng       Date:  2020-11-05

4.  Japanese translation and linguistic validation of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M).

Authors:  Geoffrey S Balkman; Soshi Samejima; Kazuki Fujimoto; Brian J Hafner
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 1.672

5.  Mobility Analysis of AmpuTees II: Comorbidities and Mobility in Lower Limb Prosthesis Users.

Authors:  Shane R Wurdeman; Phillip M Stevens; James H Campbell
Journal:  Am J Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.159

6.  Mobility analysis of AmpuTees (MAAT 5): Impact of five common prosthetic ankle-foot categories for individuals with diabetic/dysvascular amputation.

Authors:  Shane R Wurdeman; Phillip M Stevens; James H Campbell
Journal:  J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng       Date:  2019-02-13

7.  Mobility Analysis of AmpuTees (MAAT 6): Mobility, Satisfaction, and Quality of Life among Long-Term Dysvascular/Diabetic Prosthesis Users-Results of a Cross-Sectional Analysis.

Authors:  Shane R Wurdeman; Phillip M Stevens; James H Campbell
Journal:  J Prosthet Orthot       Date:  2020-02-20

8.  Laboratory- and community-based health outcomes in people with transtibial amputation using crossover and energy-storing prosthetic feet: A randomized crossover trial.

Authors:  Sara J Morgan; Cody L McDonald; Elizabeth G Halsne; Sarah M Cheever; Rana Salem; Patricia A Kramer; Brian J Hafner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Mobility Analysis of AmpuTees (MAAT I): Quality of life and satisfaction are strongly related to mobility for patients with a lower limb prosthesis.

Authors:  Shane R Wurdeman; Phillip M Stevens; James H Campbell
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2017-10-08       Impact factor: 1.895

10.  Bimodal ankle-foot prosthesis for enhanced standing stability.

Authors:  Sara R Koehler-McNicholas; Billie C Savvas Slater; Karl Koester; Eric A Nickel; John E Ferguson; Andrew H Hansen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.