| Literature DB >> 33792793 |
Harpreet Chhina1,2, Anne F Klassen3,4,5, Jacek A Kopec6, John Oliffe7, Christopher Iobst8, Noemi Dahan-Oliel9, Aditya Aggarwal10, Tim Nunn11, Anthony P Cooper12,13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lower limb deformities include conditions such as leg length discrepancy, lower limb deficiency and associated angular and rotational deformities of the hips, knees, ankles and feet. Children with lower limb deformities often have physical limitations due to gait irregularities and pain. The differences in the appearance and function of their lower limbs can discourage participation in social, recreational and leisure activities, which may result in behavioural, emotional, psychological and social adjustment problems. The health-related quality of life (HRQL) of these children is often impacted due to the factors discussed above, as well as by the complex surgical procedures. Surgical treatment options for limb deformities in children vary from limb lengthening and reconstruction to amputation. The lack of evidence demonstrating superiority of either treatment options and their effect on HRQL limits the ability of healthcare providers to counsel families on the best evidence-based treatment option for them. This manuscript describes the international qualitative study which guided the development of a new patient-reported outcome measure (PROM). Individual semi-structured face-to-face interviews with children with lower limb deformities and their parents were conducted at five sites: Canada (2 sites), Ethiopia, India and the USA.Entities:
Keywords: Children; Health- related quality of life; International study; Lower limb deformities; Patient- reported outcome instruments; Qualitative interviews
Year: 2021 PMID: 33792793 PMCID: PMC8017030 DOI: 10.1186/s41687-021-00299-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Patient Rep Outcomes ISSN: 2509-8020
Participant Demographics
| Canada - 1 | Canada - 2 | USA | India | Ethiopia | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Interviews (parent and patient) Total | 16 | 10 | 21 | 20 | 12 | 79 |
| Interviews Patients | 7 | 5 | 11 | 10 | 6 | 39 |
| Congenital Lower Limb Deformity | 6 | 5 | 11 | 7 | 5 | 34 |
| Acquired Lower Limb Deformity | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
| Average Age (in years for patients) | 13.7 | 11 | 12.3 | 13.7 | 13 | 12.9 |
| Age Range (in years for patients) | 11 to 18 | 8 to 18 | 9 to 16 | 11 to 18 | 10 to 17 | 8 to 18 |
| Gender | ||||||
| Female | 2 | 2 | 7 | 2 | 2 | 15 |
| Male | 5 | 3 | 4 | 8 | 4 | 24 |
| Interview in English | ||||||
| Yes | 16 | 0 | 21 | 0 | 0 | 37 |
| No | 0 | 10 | 0 | 20 | 12 | 42 |
List of deformities included in the study sample
| • Acquired genu valgum post treatment of Ewing's Sarcoma, leg length discrepancy due to growth disturbance due to 8 plates for treatment of genu valgum | |
| • Acquired leg length discrepancy secondary to a tibial fracture | |
| • Congenital A/K amputation | |
| • Congenital femoral deficiency | |
| • Fibular hemimelia | |
| • Congenital pseudarthrosis of tibia | |
| • Genu valgum | |
| • Infantile Blount’s Disease | |
| • Infection induced proximal tibial growth plate disturbance, proximal tibia vara, shortening and recurvatum deformities | |
| • Leg length discrepancy secondary to congenital posterior medial tibial bowing | |
| • Leg length discrepancy, Perthes | |
| • Leg length discrepancy, osteogenesis imperfecta | |
| • Leg length discrepancy secondary to left hemi-hypertrophy | |
| • Leg length discrepancy, post traumatic avascular necrosis of hip | |
| • Leg length discrepancy, arm deformities secondary to meningococcemia | |
| • Leg length discrepancy acquired due to post traumatic malunion of femur | |
| • Leg length discrepancy secondary to septic hip, osteomyelitis, avascular necrosis of hip | |
| • Leg length discrepancy | |
| • Leg length discrepancy, osteoporosis | |
| • Leg length discrepancy, osteogenesis imperfecta, osteoporosis | |
| • Leg length discrepancy, neuroblastoma at birth | |
| • Leg length discrepancy, congenital patella dislocation | |
| • Tibial deficiency (Gallop-wolfgang complex) | |
| • Right femoral hypoplasia | |
| • Right hemihypertrophy, KT syndrome | |
| • Right external tibial torsion, miserable mal-alignment syndrome, osteochondritis dissecans | |
| • Rickets, severe bilateral leg deformities | |
| • Proximal femoral focal deficiency | |
| • Post traumatic partial distal tibial physeal closure with severe deformity of the ankle |
Fig. 1Conceptual Framework
Saturation Table Showing the Number of Interviews Endorsing Each Theme and Sub-Theme
| Interviews ( | |||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Canada Site - 1 | USA | Canada Site - 2 | Total (%) | India | Ethiopia | Total (%) | |||||||||||||
| 1–5 | 6–10 | 11–16 | 17–21 | 22–26 | 27–31 | 32–37 | 38–42 | 43–47 | 48–52 | 53–57 | 58–62 | 63–67 | 68–72 | 73–77 | 78–79 | ||||
| Appearance | Appearance of body parts and scars | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 27 (47) | 4 | 3 | 5 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 19 (59) |
| Appearance | Clothes | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 9 (17) | 3 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 16 (50) |
| Appearance | Shoes and other devices | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 9 (17) | 0 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 (19) |
| Physical Health | Physical Function | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 23 (40) | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 19 (59) |
| Physical Health | Symptoms | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 15 (30) | 1 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 14 (44) |
| School | Function | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 7 (13) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 14 (44) |
| School | Participation | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 11 (21) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 12 (38) |
| School | Isolation | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 7 (9) | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 (13) |
| School | Environmental Barriers | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 (6) |
| Social | Social Function | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 12 (21) | 3 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 16 (50) |
| Social | Isolation | 2 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 15 (28) | 3 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 22 (69) |
| Psychological Health | Body Image | 2 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 17 (32) | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 16 (50) |
| Psychological Health | Distress | 2 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 19 (36) | 3 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 17 (53) |
| Psychological Health | Confidence and self-esteem | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 10 (15) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 9 (28) |
| Mediating Factors | |||||||||||||||||||
| Coping | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 5 (11) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (3) | |
| Emotional Support | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 8 (17) | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 9 (28) | |
| Instrumental Support | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 9 (19) | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 (25) | |