Prosthetics and orthotics international · 2021
Longitudinal study of prosthesis use in veterans with upper limb amputation.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Resnik Linda, Borgia Matthew, Biester Sarah, Clark Melissa A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Little is known about the patterns of prosthesis use and satisfaction of those who cease use or begin to use upper limb prostheses.
OBJECTIVES: Among a longitudinal sample of Veterans with upper limb amputation, (1) describe changes in prosthesis use over 1 year, (2) examine rates of receipt of new prostheses, and (3) compare prosthesis satisfaction in respondents who received a new prosthesis to those who did not.
STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal survey.
METHODS: 808 Veterans who had participated in a baseline interview 1 year earlier were invited to participate in structured telephone interviews.
RESULTS: A total of 562 persons with unilateral and 23 with bilateral amputation participated in the interviews (Response rate = 72.4% and 85.2%, respectively). Prosthesis use, frequency and intensity of use, and types of prostheses used were stable over 1 year. About 24% reported using a different primary terminal device type at follow-up than baseline. Prosthesis use was less frequent/intense at baseline among those who discontinued use compared with those who did not (P < 0.05), and less frequent/intense for those who started compared with those who continued using a prosthesis (P < 0.0001). Rates of prosthetic training were higher among those who received a different prosthesis type compared with those using the same type (P = 0.06). Satisfaction scores were higher (P < 0.01) for new prosthesis recipients, and lower at baseline for prosthesis abandoners compared with continued users (P = 0.03).
CONCLUSION: Prosthesis abandonment appears to be predicated on dissatisfaction with the device, as well as less frequent/intense prosthesis use. These findings can be used to identify those at risk for prosthesis abandonment and improve their prosthesis experience.
OBJECTIVES: Among a longitudinal sample of Veterans with upper limb amputation, (1) describe changes in prosthesis use over 1 year, (2) examine rates of receipt of new prostheses, and (3) compare prosthesis satisfaction in respondents who received a new prosthesis to those who did not.
STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal survey.
METHODS: 808 Veterans who had participated in a baseline interview 1 year earlier were invited to participate in structured telephone interviews.
RESULTS: A total of 562 persons with unilateral and 23 with bilateral amputation participated in the interviews (Response rate = 72.4% and 85.2%, respectively). Prosthesis use, frequency and intensity of use, and types of prostheses used were stable over 1 year. About 24% reported using a different primary terminal device type at follow-up than baseline. Prosthesis use was less frequent/intense at baseline among those who discontinued use compared with those who did not (P < 0.05), and less frequent/intense for those who started compared with those who continued using a prosthesis (P < 0.0001). Rates of prosthetic training were higher among those who received a different prosthesis type compared with those using the same type (P = 0.06). Satisfaction scores were higher (P < 0.01) for new prosthesis recipients, and lower at baseline for prosthesis abandoners compared with continued users (P = 0.03).
CONCLUSION: Prosthesis abandonment appears to be predicated on dissatisfaction with the device, as well as less frequent/intense prosthesis use. These findings can be used to identify those at risk for prosthesis abandonment and improve their prosthesis experience.