Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineering · 2025
Effects of conventional versus 3D-printed cosmetic covers on user satisfaction and psychosocial well-being in lower limb prostheses users: A randomised crossover trial.
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.
Ramstrand Nerrolyn, Riveiro Maria, Eriksson Lars, Ceder Michael
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of prescribing a traditional foam cosmetic cover versus a more recently developed 3D printed cosmetic cover on the satisfaction and psychosocial wellbeing of prosthesis users.
METHODS: Transtibial and transfemoral prosthesis users were randomly assigned into two groups. One group was fitted with a foam cosmesis with a nylon stocking while the other received a 3D printed cosmetic cover. Cosmeses were worn for 12 weeks before being switched to the alternate design. Outcomes related to satisfaction and psychosocial wellbeing (ABIS-R, TAPES, QUEST) were collected on 3 occasions. Linear mixed effects models assessed for differences between the cosmetic covers.
RESULTS: 10 participants completed all outcome measures on 3 occasions. Significant differences in favour of the 3D printed cosmesis were observed for TAPES general psychosocial adjustment (p = .03), TAPES aesthetic satisfaction (p = .04) and ABIS-R (p = .025). Adjustment to physical limitations were higher for the foam cover (p = .008). No differences were observed in QUEST scores. Covariates; age, time since amputation, extroversion, did not have any significant effects.
CONCLUSION: Results suggest that cosmetic cover design can significantly affect prosthesis users' psychosocial wellbeing and satisfaction with aesthetic appearance. Variance between participants is high indicating diverse preferences.
METHODS: Transtibial and transfemoral prosthesis users were randomly assigned into two groups. One group was fitted with a foam cosmesis with a nylon stocking while the other received a 3D printed cosmetic cover. Cosmeses were worn for 12 weeks before being switched to the alternate design. Outcomes related to satisfaction and psychosocial wellbeing (ABIS-R, TAPES, QUEST) were collected on 3 occasions. Linear mixed effects models assessed for differences between the cosmetic covers.
RESULTS: 10 participants completed all outcome measures on 3 occasions. Significant differences in favour of the 3D printed cosmesis were observed for TAPES general psychosocial adjustment (p = .03), TAPES aesthetic satisfaction (p = .04) and ABIS-R (p = .025). Adjustment to physical limitations were higher for the foam cover (p = .008). No differences were observed in QUEST scores. Covariates; age, time since amputation, extroversion, did not have any significant effects.
CONCLUSION: Results suggest that cosmetic cover design can significantly affect prosthesis users' psychosocial wellbeing and satisfaction with aesthetic appearance. Variance between participants is high indicating diverse preferences.