Developing consensus on important factors associated with lower limb prosthetic prescription and use

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 34, Issue 24, 2012, Pages 2085-2094

  Schaffalitzky, Elisabeth ^a,b   Gallagher, Pamela ^a,b   MacLachlan, Malcolm ^b,c   Wegener, Stephen T ^d  

^a DUBLIN CITY UNIVERSITY   (Ireland)

^b Dublin Psychoprosthetics Group   (Ireland)

^c TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN   (Ireland)

^d JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Lower limb amputation; Prosthetic; Psychosocial factors

Indexed keywords

AMPUTATION; ARTICLE; CONSENSUS; CONSUMER; DELPHI STUDY; DISABLED PERSON; EXPERT WITNESS; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INTERVIEW; LEG; LIMB PROSTHESIS; PRESCRIPTION; PROSTHESIS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARD; STATISTICS; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

AMPUTATION; AMPUTEES; ARTIFICIAL LIMBS; CONSENSUS; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; DELPHI TECHNIQUE; EXPERT TESTIMONY; FOCUS GROUPS; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; LOWER EXTREMITY; PRESCRIPTIONS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 84867319983     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: 14645165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2012.671885     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Schoppen T, Boonstra A, Groothoff J W, de Vries J, Göeken LN, Eisma WH. Physical, mental, and social predictors of functional outcome in unilateral lower-limb amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2003;84:803-811.
2. Pezzin LE, Dillingham TR, Mackenzie EJ, Ephraim P, Rossbach P. Use and satisfaction with prosthetic limb devices and related services. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:723-729.
3. Reiber GE, McFarland LV, Hubbard S, Maynard C, Blough DK, Gambel JM, Smith DG. Servicemembers and veterans with major traumatic limb loss from Vietnam war and OIF/OEF conflicts: survey methods, participants, and summary findings. J Rehabil Res Dev 2010;47:275-297.
4. Karmarkar AM, Collins DM, Wichman T, Franklin A, Fitzgerald SG, Dicianno BE, Pasquina PF, Cooper RA. Prosthesis and wheelchair use in veterans with lower-limb amputation. J Rehabil Res Dev 2009;46:567-576.
5. Nair A, Hanspal RS, Zahedi MS, Saif M, Fisher K. Analyses of prosthetic episodes in lower limb amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int 2008;32:42-49.
6. Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, Travison TG, Brookmeyer R. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008;89:422-429.
7. Schaffalitzky E, NiMhurchadha S, Gallagher P, Hofkamp S, MacLachlan M, Wegener ST. Identifying the values and preferences of prosthetic users: a case study series using the repertory grid technique. Prosthet Orthot Int 2009;33:157-166.
8. Bilodeau S, Hébert R, Desrosiers J. Lower limb prosthesis utilisation by elderly amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int 2000;24:126-132.
9. Kauzlaric N, Kauzlaric KS, Kolundzic R. Prosthetic rehabilitation of persons with lower limb amputations due to tumour. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2007;16:238-243.
10. Brown-Triolo DL. Understanding the person behind the technology. In: Scherer MJ, editor. Assistive technology. Matching device and consumer for successful rehabilitation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2002. pp. 31-46.
11. Deathe B, Miller WC, Speechley M. The status of outcome measurement in amputee rehabilitation in Canada. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:912-918.
12. Larner S, van Ross E, Hale C. Do psychological measures predict the ability of lower limb amputees to learn to use a prosthesis? Clin Rehabil 2003;17:493-498.
13. Gailey RS. Predictive outcome measures versus functional outcome measures in the lower limb amputee. J Prosthet Orthot 2006;18:51-60.
14. MacLachlan M. Embodiment: clinical, critical and cultural perspectives on health and illness. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press; 2004.
15. Campbell SM, Roland MO, Buetow SA. Defining quality of care. Soc Sci Med 2000;51:1611-1625.
16. Campbell SM, Cantrill JA. Consensus methods in prescribing research. J Clin Pharm Ther 2001;26:5-14.
17. Hoppestad BS. Essential elements for assessment of persons with severe neurological impairments for computer access utilizing assistive technology devices: a Delphi study. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2006;1:3-16.
18. Stucki G, Ewert T, Cieza A. Value and application of the ICF in rehabilitation medicine. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:932-938.
19. Czinkota MR, Ronkainen IA. International business and trade in the next decade: report from a Delphi study. J of Int Business 1997;28:458-467.
20. Marsden J, Dolan B, Holt L. Nurse practitioner practice and deployment: electronic mail Delphi study. J Adv Nurs 2003;43:595-605.
21. Khan F, Pallant JF. Use of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) to identify preliminary comprehensive and brief core sets for multiple sclerosis. Disabil Rehabil 2007;29:205-213.
22. Weigl M, Cieza A, Andersen C, Kollerits B, Amann E, Stucki G. Identification of relevant ICF categories in patients with chronic health conditions: a Delphi exercise. J Rehabil Med 2004;44:12-21.
23. Mortenson WB, Miller WC, Boily J, Steele B, Crawford EM, Desharnais G. Overarching principles and salient findings for inclusion in guidelines for power mobility use within residential care facilities. J Rehabil Res Dev 2006;43:199-208.
24. Petry K, Maes B, Vlaskamp C. Operationalizing quality of life for people with profound multiple disabilities: a Delphi study. J Intellect Disabil Res 2007;51:334-349.
25. Reiber GE, Smith DG. VA paradigm shift in care of veterans with limb loss. J Rehabil Res Dev 2010;47:vii-vix.
26. Sigford BJ. Paradigm shift for VA amputation care. J Rehabil Res Dev 2010;47:xv-xix.
27. CARF International. 2011. Medical rehabilitation program descriptions. Available at: http://www.carf.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=23992. Accessed on March 2011.
28. Linstone HA, Turoff M. The Delphi method techniques and applications. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1975.
29. Hackett S, Masson H, Phillips S. Exploring consensus in practice with youth who are sexually abusive: findings from a Delphi study of practitioner views in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Child Maltreat 2006;11:146-156.
30. van der Linde H, Hofstad CJ, van Limbeek J, Postema K, Geertzen JH. Use of the Delphi Technique for developing national clinical guidelines for prescription of lower-limb prostheses. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005;42:693-704.
31. Finger ME, Cieza A, Stoll J, Stucki G, Huber EO. Identification of intervention categories for physical therapy, based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health: a Delphi exercise. Phys Ther 2006;86:1203-1220.
32. Wielandt T, Mckenna K, Tooth L, Strong J. Factors that predict the post-discharge use of recommended assistive technology (AT). Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2006;1:29-40.
33. Whitehead D. An international Delphi study examining health promotion and health education in nursing practice, education and policy. J Clin Nurs 2008;17:891-900.
34. Campbell SM, Hann M, Roland MO, Quayle JA, Shekelle PG. The effect of panel membership and feedback on ratings in a two-round Delphi survey: results of a randomized controlled trial. Med Care 1999;37:964-968.
35. Schaffalitzky E, Gallagher P, Maclachlan M, Ryall N. Understanding the benefits of prosthetic prescription: exploring the experiences of practitioners and lower limb prosthetic users. Disabil Rehabil 2011;33:1314-1323.
36. Fuhrer MJ. Subjectifying quality of life as a medical rehabilitation outcome. Disabil Rehabil 2000;22:481-489.
37. Gallagher P, Desmond D. Measuring quality of life in prosthetic practice: benefits and challenges. Prosthet Orthot Int 2007;31:167-176.
38. Heinemann AW, Fisher W P, Gershon R. Improving health care quality with outcomes management. J Prosthet Orthot 2006;18:46-50.
39. Gauthier-Gagnon C, Grisé MC, Potvin D. Enabling factors related to prosthetic use by people with transtibial and transfemoral amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999;80:706-713.
40. Brunelli S, Averna T, Porcacchia P, Paolucci S, Di Meo F, Traballesi M. Functional status and factors influencing the rehabilitation outcome of people affected by above-knee amputation and hemiparesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006;87:995-1000.
41. Kurichi JE, Kwong PL, Reker DM, Bates BE, Marshall CR, Stineman MG. Clinical factors associated with prescription of a prosthetic limb in elderly veterans. J Am Geriatr Soc 2007;55:900-906.
42. Maclean N, Pound P. A critical review of the concept of patient motivation in the literature on physical rehabilitation. Soc Sci Med 2000;50:495-506.
43. Kortte KB, Falk LD, Castillo RC, Johnson-Greene D, Wegener ST. The Hopkins Rehabilitation Engagement Rating Scale: development and psychometric properties. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:877-884.
44. O'Neill BF, Evans JJ. Memory and executive function predict mobility rehabilitation outcome after lower-limb amputation. Disabil Rehabil 2009;31:1083-1091.
45. Barnes C, Conner D, Legault L, Reznickova N, Harrison-Felix C. Rehabilitation outcomes in cognitively impaired patients admitted to skilled nursing facilities from the community. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85:1602-1607.
46. Berke GM, Fergason J, Milani JR, Hattingh J, McDowell M, Nguyen V, Reiber GE. Comparison of satisfaction with current prosthetic care in veterans and servicemembers from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts with major traumatic limb loss. J Rehabil Res Dev 2010;47:361-371.
47. Okoli C, Pawlowski D. The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inf Manage 2004;42:15-29.
48. Baker JA, Lovell K, Harris N, Campbell M. Multidisciplinary consensus of best practice for pro re nata (PRN) psychotropic medications within acute mental health settings: a Delphi study. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs 2007;14:478-484.