Epidemiologic overview of individuals with upper-limb loss and their reported research priorities

Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 2-11

  Atkins, Diane J ^a,b   Heard, Denise C Y ^c   Donovan, William H ^c,d,e  

^a Institute for Rehabilitation and Research   (United States)

^b BAYLOR COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c Amputee Program

^d Spinal Cord Injury Program

^e UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030554768     PISSN: 10408800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00008526-199600810-00003     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Childress DS. Historical aspects of powered-limb prostheses. Clin Pros and Orth 1985; 9:1:2-13.
2. LeBlanc MA. Patient population and other estimates of prosthetics and orthotics in the USA. Orth and Pros September 1973; 27:3:38-44.
3. Leonard JA, Meier RH. Prosthetics. In: DeLisa JA (ed). Rehabilitation medicine: principles and practice. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1993:330-45.
4. Kay HW, Newman JD. Relative incidences of new amputations: statistical comparisons of 6,000 new amputees. Orth and Pros June 1975; 29:2:3-16.
5. Glattly HW. A statistical study of 12,000 new amputees. Southern Med J November 1964; 57:1:1373-78.
6. LaPlante MA. Data on disability from the national health interview survey, 1983-85: an info use report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, 1988.
7. Prevalence of selected chronic conditions. Hyattsville, Md.: National Center for Health Statistics, State of Maryland Vital and Health Statistics, 1979-81; 10:155:29,32.
8. Detailed diagnoses and procedures for patients discharged from short-stay hospitals. Hyattsville, Md.: National Center for Health Statistics, State of Maryland Vital and Health Statistics,1984; 13:86:182,279-80.
9. Table 1 - Selected population and housing characteristics for the United States. The 1990 U.S. Census. 1990.
10. Digest of data of persons with disabilities. Mathematical policy research. Washington, D.C.: U.S. National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, January 1992:28-30.
11. Krebs DE, Edelstein JE, Thornby MA. Prosthetic management of children with limb deficiencies. PhysTher December 1991; 71:12:920-34.
12. McDonnell PM, Scott RN, McKay LA. Incidence of congenital upper-limb deficiencies. J of the Assn of Children's ProsOrth Clinics Spring 1988; 23:1:8-14.
13. Kejlaa GH. The social and economic outcome after upper-limb amputation. Pros and Orth Int 1992; 16:25-31.
14. Gregory-Dean A. Amputations: statistics and trends. Annals of the Royal College of Surg of England 1991; 73:137-42.
15. LeBlanc MA. Innovation and improvement of body-powered arm prostheses: a first step. Clin Pros and Orth 1985; 9:1:13-6.
16. Scott RN, Parker PA. Myoelectric prostheses: state of the art. J of Med Eng and Tech July/Aug 1988; 12:4:143-51.
17. Dalsey R et al. Myoelectric prosthetic replacement in the upper-extremity amputee. Orthop Rev June 1989; XVIII:6:697-702.
18. Bergman K, Ornholmer L, Zackresson K, Thyberg M. Functional benefit of an adaptive myoelectric prosthetic hand compared to a conventional myoelectric hand. Pros and Orth Int 1992; 16:32-7.
19. Edelstein JE, Berger N. Performance comparison among children fitted with myoelectric and body-powered hand. Arch Phys Med Rehab 1993; 74:376-80.
20. Ballance R, Wilson BN, Harder JA. Factors affecting myoelectric prosthetic use and wearing patterns in the juvenile unilateral transradial amputee. Canad J of Occup Ther 1989; 56:3:132-7.
21. Kruger LM, Fishman S. Myoelectric and body-powered prostheses. J of Ped Orthop 1993; 13:68-75.
22. Kejlaa GH. Consumer concerns and functional values of prostheses to upper-limb amputees Pros and Orth Int 1993; 17:157-63.
23. Burger H, Marincek C. Upper-limb prosthetic use in Slovenia. Pros and Orth Int 1994; 18:25-33.
24. Van Lunteren A, Van Lunteren-Gerritsen GNM, Stassen NC, Zuithoff MJ. A field evaluation of arm prostheses for unilateral amputees. Pros and Orth Int 1983; 7:141-51.
25. Van Lunteren A, Van Lunteren-Gerritsen GNM. On the use of prostheses by children with a unilateral congenital forearm defect. J of Rehab Sci 1989; 2:1:10-2.
26. Millstein SG, Hegar H, Hunter GA. Prosthetic use in adult upper-limb amputees: a comparison of body-powered and electrically powered prostheses. Pros and Orth Int 1986; 10:27-34.
27. Melendez D, LeBlanc M. Survey of arm amputees not wearing prostheses: implications for research and service. J of the Assoc of Children's Pros-Orth Clinics 1989; 23:3:62-9.
28. Nielsen CC. A survey of amputees: functional level and life satisfaction, information needs, and the prosthetist's role. JPO 1991; 3:3:125-9.
29. Nicholas JJ et al. Problems experienced and perceived by prosthetic patients. JPO January 1993; 5:1:16-9.
30. Davies EJ, Fritz BR, Clippinger FW. Amputees and their prostheses. Artificial Limbs 1970; 14:2:19-48.
31. LeBlanc MA. Use of prosthetic prehensors. Pros and Orth Int 1988;12:152-4.
32. Hubbard S, Bush G, Kurtz I, Naumann S. Myoelectric prostheses for the limb-deficient child. Phys Med and Rehab Clinics of North America November 1991; 2:4:847-66.
33. Le Blanc MA. Expert analysis of the TIRR National Upper-Limb Amputee Database. Archived at The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research in Houston, November 1994.
34. Childress DS. Expert analysis of the TIRR National Upper-Limb Amputee Database. Archived at The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research in Houston, November 1994.
35. Heckathorne CW. Expert analysis of the TIRR National Upper-Limb Amputee Database. Archived at The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research in Houston, November 1994.
36. Scott RN. Expert analysis of the TIRR National Upper-Limb Amputee Database. Archived at The Institute for Rehabilitation and Research in Houston, November 1994.