Journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2022
Knee Disarticulation Versus Transfemoral Amputation: The Prosthetist's Perspective.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Parry Joshua A, Neufeld Eric
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to survey a broad group of prosthetists on their experience with amputees with knee disarticulation (KD) and transfemoral amputation (TFA) to determine their preference of amputation level, opinions on patient preference, and common problematic issues to guide decision-making for patients and surgeons faced with the decision of a high-level lower extremity amputation.
DESIGN: This is a survey-based study.
INTERVENTION: A blinded electronic mail survey was completed by 102 prosthetists.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Each prosthetist was asked (1) what amputation level (KD or TFA) do they prefer and why and (2) which amputation level do they believe patients prefer and why.
RESULTS: There was no consensus among prosthetists regarding amputation level preference. Fifty-four (53%) prosthetists preferred KD and 48 (47%) preferred TFA. Fifty-five (54%) prosthetists believed patients preferred TFA and 47 (46%) believed patients preferred KD. Amputation level preference often depended on age, functional goals, and concerns with cosmesis. The most common benefits given for KD over TFA included distal-end weight-bearing (n = 53), a lower subischial socket (n = 43), and better function (n = 30). The most common disadvantages given for KD over TFA included component limitations due to space available below amputation (n = 56), poor cosmesis (n = 49), an asymmetrical knee axis (n = 42), and difficulties with sitting/standing (n = 13).
CONCLUSION: No consensus exists between prosthetists regarding preference for KD versus TFA. The advantages and disadvantages of KD reported in this study, along with the associated decision tree, can be used for future counseling of patient's faced with high-level lower extremity amputations.
DESIGN: This is a survey-based study.
INTERVENTION: A blinded electronic mail survey was completed by 102 prosthetists.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Each prosthetist was asked (1) what amputation level (KD or TFA) do they prefer and why and (2) which amputation level do they believe patients prefer and why.
RESULTS: There was no consensus among prosthetists regarding amputation level preference. Fifty-four (53%) prosthetists preferred KD and 48 (47%) preferred TFA. Fifty-five (54%) prosthetists believed patients preferred TFA and 47 (46%) believed patients preferred KD. Amputation level preference often depended on age, functional goals, and concerns with cosmesis. The most common benefits given for KD over TFA included distal-end weight-bearing (n = 53), a lower subischial socket (n = 43), and better function (n = 30). The most common disadvantages given for KD over TFA included component limitations due to space available below amputation (n = 56), poor cosmesis (n = 49), an asymmetrical knee axis (n = 42), and difficulties with sitting/standing (n = 13).
CONCLUSION: No consensus exists between prosthetists regarding preference for KD versus TFA. The advantages and disadvantages of KD reported in this study, along with the associated decision tree, can be used for future counseling of patient's faced with high-level lower extremity amputations.