Literature DB >> 28209508

Systematic Review of Measures of Impairment and Activity Limitation for Persons With Upper Limb Trauma and Amputation.

Linda Resnik1, Matt Borgia2, Ben Silver3, Jill Cancio4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: (1) To identify outcome measures used in studies of persons with traumatic upper limb injury and/or amputation; and (2) to evaluate focus, content, and psychometric properties of each measure. DATA SOURCES: Searches of PubMed and CINAHL for terms including upper extremity, function, activities of daily living, outcome assessment, amputation, and traumatic injuries. STUDY SELECTION: Included articles had a sample of ≥10 adults with limb trauma or amputation and were in English. Measures containing most items assessing impairment of body function or activity limitation were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: There were 260 articles containing 55 measures that were included. Data on internal consistency; test-retest, interrater, and intrarater reliability; content, structural, construct, concurrent, and predictive validity; responsiveness; and floor/ceiling effects were extracted and confirmed by a second investigator. DATA SYNTHESIS: The mostly highly rated performance measures included 2 amputation-specific measures (Activities Measure for Upper Limb Amputees and University of New Brunswick Test of Prosthetic Function skill and spontaneity subscales) and 2 non-amputation-specific measures (Box and Block Test and modified Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test light and heavy cans tests). Most highly rated self-report measures were Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand; Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation; QuickDASH; Hand Assessment Tool; International Osteoporosis Foundation Quality of Life Questionnaire; and Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation functional recovery subscale. None were amputation specific.
CONCLUSIONS: Few performance measures were recommended for patients with limb trauma and amputation. All top-rated self-report measures were suitable for use in both groups. These results will inform choice of outcome measures for these patients. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Amputation; Disability evaluation; Rehabilitation; Upper extremity; Wounds and injuries

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28209508     DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.01.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil        ISSN: 0003-9993            Impact factor:   3.966


  9 in total

1.  An Alternative Myoelectric Pattern Recognition Approach for the Control of Hand Prostheses: A Case Study of Use in Daily Life by a Dysmelia Subject.

Authors:  Enzo Mastinu; Johan Ahlberg; Eva Lendaro; Liselotte Hermansson; Bo Hakansson; Max Ortiz-Catalan
Journal:  IEEE J Transl Eng Health Med       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 3.316

2.  Visualisation of upper limb activity using spirals: A new approach to the assessment of daily prosthesis usage.

Authors:  Alix Chadwell; Laurence Kenney; Malcolm Granat; Sibylle Thies; John S Head; Adam Galpin
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2017-06-26       Impact factor: 1.895

3.  Functional evaluation of a non-assembly 3D-printed hand prosthesis.

Authors:  Juan Sebastian Cuellar; Gerwin Smit; Paul Breedveld; Amir Abbas Zadpoor; Dick Plettenburg
Journal:  Proc Inst Mech Eng H       Date:  2019-09-06       Impact factor: 1.617

4.  Quantitative Eye Gaze and Movement Differences in Visuomotor Adaptations to Varying Task Demands Among Upper-Extremity Prosthesis Users.

Authors:  Jacqueline S Hebert; Quinn A Boser; Aïda M Valevicius; Hiroki Tanikawa; Ewen B Lavoie; Albert H Vette; Patrick M Pilarski; Craig S Chapman
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2019-09-04

5.  Myoelectric prosthesis users and non-disabled individuals wearing a simulated prosthesis exhibit similar compensatory movement strategies.

Authors:  Heather E Williams; Craig S Chapman; Patrick M Pilarski; Albert H Vette; Jacqueline S Hebert
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 4.262

6.  The client satisfaction with device: a Rasch validation of the Arabic version in patients with upper and lower limb amputation.

Authors:  Hadeel R Bakhsh; Nilüfer Kablan; Walaa Alammar; Yaşar Tatar; Giorgio Ferriero
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2021-04-27       Impact factor: 3.186

7.  Application of Emergency Specialist Nursing Combined with Green Channel Mode in Patients with Limb Amputation.

Authors:  Zaiyun Qian; Min Wang; Tonglong Xu
Journal:  Appl Bionics Biomech       Date:  2022-04-19       Impact factor: 1.664

8.  How do the outcomes of the DEKA Arm compare to conventional prostheses?

Authors:  Linda J Resnik; Matthew L Borgia; Frantzy Acluche; Jill M Cancio; Gail Latlief; Nicole Sasson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Graded response model fit, measurement invariance and (comparative) precision of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS® Upper Extremity V2.0 item bank in patients with upper extremity disorders.

Authors:  C M Lameijer; S G J van Bruggen; E J A Haan; D F P Van Deurzen; K Van der Elst; V Stouten; A J Kaat; L D Roorda; C B Terwee
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-03-16       Impact factor: 2.362

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.