Literature DB >> 30182755

Stakeholder perspectives for possible residual limb monitoring system for persons with lower-limb amputation.

Lilly Tran1, Ryan Caldwell1,2, Matthew Quigley3, Stefania Fatone1.   

Abstract

Purpose: To gather ideas from lower-limb prosthesis users and certified prosthetists regarding possible residual limb monitoring system features and data presentation. We also gathered information on the type of residual limb problems typically encountered, how they currently manage those problems, and their ideas for methods to better manage them.Materials and methods: Two focus groups were held; one with certified prosthetists and another with lower-limb prosthesis users. Open-ended questions were used in a moderated discussion that was audio recorded, transcribed, and assessed using applied thematic analysis.Results and conclusions: Seven individuals participated in each focus group. Prosthetists came from a mix of practice settings, while prosthesis users were diverse in level of amputation, aetiology, and years of experience using lower-limb prostheses. Residual limb problems reported by participants were consistent with those in the literature. Participants suggested better managing residual limb problems through improved education, better detection of residual limb problems, and using sensor-based information to improve prosthetic technology. Participants favoured short-term use of a possible residual limb monitoring systems to troubleshoot residual limb problems, with temperature and pressure the most frequently mentioned measurements. Participants described that an ideal residual limb monitoring system would be lightweight, not interfere with prosthesis function, and result in benefits with regard to prosthetic care and socket function that outweighed inconveniences or concerns regarding system use. A potential positive of system use included having objective data for reimbursement justification, although it was pointed out that the residual limb monitoring system itself also needed to be reimbursable.Implications for RehabilitationStakeholders suggested better managing residual limb problems through improved education, better detection of residual limb problems, and using sensor-based information to improve prosthetic technology.Stakeholders favored short-term use of a possible system to troubleshoot residual limb problems, with temperature and pressure the most frequently mentioned measurements.Stakeholders described that an ideal residual limb monitoring system would be lightweight, not interfere with prosthesis function, and result in benefits with regard to prosthetic care and socket function that outweighs any inconveniences or concerns regarding system use.Stakeholders indicated that a potential positive of system use included having objective data for reimbursement justification, although it was pointed out that the residual limb monitoring system itself also needed to be reimbursable.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Lower-limb prosthesis; amputation rehabilitation; focus groups; prosthetic interface; residual limb monitoring

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30182755      PMCID: PMC6401343          DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2018.1492634

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Disabil Rehabil        ISSN: 0963-8288            Impact factor:   3.033


  31 in total

1.  Residual-limb skin temperature in transtibial sockets.

Authors:  Jeffrey T Peery; William R Ledoux; Glenn K Klute
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2005 Mar-Apr

2.  Applying emergent ubiquitous technologies in health: the need to respond to new challenges of opportunity, expectation, and responsibility.

Authors:  Michael Rigby
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2007-04-16       Impact factor: 4.046

3.  A pressure and shear sensing liner for prosthetic sockets.

Authors:  Jason Wheeler; Anirban Mazumdar; Lisa Marron; Kevin Dullea; Joan Sanders; Kate Allyn
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2016-08

4.  Does activity affect residual limb skin temperatures?

Authors:  Glenn K Klute; Elizabeth Huff; William R Ledoux
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Consequences of non-vascular trans-femoral amputation: a survey of quality of life, prosthetic use and problems.

Authors:  K Hagberg; R Brånemark
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 1.895

Review 6.  Biomechanics of pressure ulcer in body tissues interacting with external forces during locomotion.

Authors:  Arthur F T Mak; Ming Zhang; Eric W C Tam
Journal:  Annu Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2010-08-15       Impact factor: 9.590

7.  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

8.  Clinical implication of interface pressure for a new prosthetic suspension system.

Authors:  Hossein Gholizadeh; Noor Azuan Abu Osman; Arezoo Eshraghi; Nasrul Anuar Abd Razak
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2014-06-30       Impact factor: 2.819

Review 9.  Mobile phone use and glioma risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Ming Yang; WenWen Guo; ChunSheng Yang; JianQin Tang; Qian Huang; ShouXin Feng; AiJun Jiang; XiFeng Xu; Guan Jiang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  The capability of fiber Bragg grating sensors to measure amputees' trans-tibial stump/socket interface pressures.

Authors:  Ebrahim A Al-Fakih; Noor Azuan Abu Osman; Arezoo Eshraghi; Faisal Rafiq Mahamd Adikan
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2013-08-12       Impact factor: 3.576

View more
  1 in total

1.  CHECKLIST USE FOR ASSESSMENT OF SATISFACTION WITH TRANS-TIBIAL PROSTHESES.

Authors:  Erwin C Baars; Jan H Geertzen; Pieter U Dijkstra
Journal:  J Rehabil Med Clin Commun       Date:  2021-04-29
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.