An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the embodiment of artificial limbs

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 26, Issue 16, 2004, Pages 963-973

  Murray, C D ^a  

^a LIVERPOOL HOPE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADJUSTMENT; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AWARENESS; BODY IMAGE; BODY MOVEMENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; E-MAIL; EXPERIENCE; FEMALE; GAIT; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERVIEW; LIMB AMPUTATION; LIMB PROSTHESIS; MALE; MEDICAL RECORD; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MOTIVATION; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PHANTOM; PHENOMENOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTIFICIAL LIMBS; AWARENESS; BODY IMAGE; FEMALE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MUSCULOSKELETAL EQUILIBRIUM; PHANTOM LIMB;

EID: 4544318643     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09638280410001696764     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Cutson TM, Bongiorni DR. Rehabilitation of the older lower limb amputee: A brief review. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 1996; 44(11): 1388-1393.
2. Williamson GM, Schulz R, Bridges MW, Behan AM. Social and psychological factors in adjustment to limb amputation. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality 1994; 9: 249-268.
3. Ham RO, Cotton LT. Limb Amputation: From Aetiology to Rehabilitation. London: Chapman and Hall, 1991.
4. Gallagher P, MacLachlin M. Development and psychometric evaluation of the Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Scales (TAPES). Rehabilitation Psychology 2000; 45(2): 130-154.
5. Friedmann LW. The Psychological Rehabilitation of the Amputee. Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Publisher, 1978.
6. Millstein SG, Heger H, Hunter GA. Prosthetic use in adult and upper limb amputees: A comparison or the body powered and electrically powered prostheses. Prosthetics and Orthotics International 1986; 10: 27-34.
7. Stein RB, Waky OT. Functional comparison of upper extremity amputees using myoelectric and conventional prostheses. Archives of Physical Medical Rehabilitation 1983; 64: 243-248.
8. Balance R, Wilson B, Harder JA. Factors affecting myoelectric prosthetic use and wearing patterns in the juvenile unilateral below-elbow amputee. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy 1989; 56(3): 132-137.
9. Waters R, Perry J, Antonelli D, Hislop H. Energy cost of walking of amputees: the influence of level of amputation. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 1976; 58-A part 1: 42-46.
10. Khoury SA. Evaluation of amputees. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 1983; 6(4): 449-454.
11. Hermodsson Y, Ekdahl C, Persson BM. Outcome after trans-tibial amputation for vascular disease - A follow-up after eight years. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences 1998; 12(2): 73-80.
12. Bilodeau S, Herbert R, DesRosiers J. Lower limb milisation by elderly amputees. Prosthetics and Orthotics International 2000; 24(2): 126-132.
13. Breakey JW. Body image: The lower-limb amputee. Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics 1997; 9(2): 58-66.
14. Fisher K, Hanspal R. Body image and patients with amputations: does the prosthesis maintain the balance? International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 1998; 21(4): 355-363.
15. Rybarczyk BD, Nyenhuis DL, Nicholas JJ, Cash SM, Kaiser J. Body image, perceived social stigma, and the prediction of psychosocial adjustment to leg amputation. Rehabilitation Psychology 1995; 40(2): 95-110.
16. Noble D, Price D, Gilder R. Psychiatric disturbance following amputation. American Journal of Psychiatry 1954; 110: 609.
17. Schilder P. The Image and Appearance of the Human Body. New York: International Press, 1935/1950.
18. Heidegger M. Being and Time. New York: Harper and Row. [Translated by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson], 1962.
19. Merleau-Ponty M. The Phenomenology of Perception. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. [Translated by C. Smith], 1970.
20. Ihde D. Technology and the Lifeworld: From Garden to Earth. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University, 1990.
21. Leder D. The Absent Body. London: The University of Chicago Press, 1990.
22. Kujundzic N, Buschert, W. Instruments and the body: Sartre and Merleau-Ponty. Research in Phenomenology 1994; 24: 206-215.
23. Scarry E. The merging of bodies and artifacts in the social contract. In: G Bender, T Druckery (eds) Culture on the Brink: Ideologies of Technology. Seattle: Bay Press, 1994; 85-97.
24. Churcher J. Implications and applications of Piaget's sensorimotor concepts. In: OG Selfridge, EL Rissland, MA Arbib (eds) Adaptive Control of Ill-Defined Systems. New York and London: Plenum Press, 1984; 289-304.
25. Sheridan TB, Mann RW. Design of control devices for people with motor impairment. Human Factors 1978; 20(3): 321-338.
26. Fraser C. Does an artificial limb become part of the user? British Journal of Occupational Therapy 1984; 47(2): 43-45.
27. McDonnell PM. Developmental response to limb deficiency and limb replacement. Canadian Journal of Psychology 1988; 42(2): 120-143.
28. McDonnell PM, Scott R, Dickerson J, Theriault R, Wood B. Do artificial limbs become part of the user? New evidence. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Deviancy 1989; 26(2): 17-24.
29. Smith JA. Semi-structured interviewing and qualitative analysis. In: J Smith, R Harre, LV Langenhove (eds) Rethinking Methods in Psychology. London: Sage, 1995.
30. Murray CD, Sixsmith J. E-mail: A qualitative research medium for interviewing? International Journal of Social Research Methodology Theory and Practice 1998; 1(2): 103-121.
31. Murray CD, Sixsmith J. Qualitative health research via the Internet: Practical and methodological issues. Health Informatics 2002; 8: 47-63.
32. Smith JA, Jarman M, Osborn M. Doing interpretative phenomenological analysis. In: M Murray, K Chamberlain (eds) Qualitative Health Psychology: Theories and Methods. London: Sage, 1999; 218-240.