SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Surgery and Medicine / 2021 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 5

Outcome measures used in lower extremity amputation: Review of clinical use and psychometric properties

Alt Ekstremite Amputasyonunda Kullanılan Sonuç Ölçütleri: Klinik Kullanım ve Psikometrik Özelliklerin Gözden Geçirilmesi

Nazım Tolgahan YILDIZ
Hikmet KOCAMAN
Fatma Gül YAZICIOĞLU
Pages
544–549
Publication Date
2021-05-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

We believe that this study will help healthcare professionals serving in the field of LEA and prosthetics to learn about and choose the appropriate OMs.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Decreased mobility and negative effects of poor functional status (FS) significantly reduce the quality of life in individuals with lower extremity amputation (LEA).
📊
Key Findings & Data:These parameters should be evaluated in detail, and FS should be revealed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We believe that this study will help healthcare professionals serving in the field of LEA and prosthetics to learn about and choose the appropriate OMs.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Amputation · Lower extremity · Outcome assessment

Abstract

Decreased mobility and negative effects of poor functional status (FS) significantly reduce the quality of life in individuals with lower extremity amputation (LEA). These parameters should be evaluated in detail, and FS should be revealed. Measuring the results is important in terms of enabling clinicians to evaluate the quality of care and the effectiveness of treatment. The fact that the measurements are not purposeful makes the obtained results (evidence) and consecutively treatments unreliable. To obtain valid and reliable results, it is important to use measurement tools that are valid and reliable. Considering all these, the current FS should be evaluated using valid and reliable outcome measures (OMs). Numerous OMs are used to evaluate the FS of individuals with LEA. The multiplicity of available criteria, when coupled with the concept of multidimensional FS, complicates the selection of appropriate OMs for use with this population. Resources providing information about OMs used in the domain of LEA are limited in the literature. Many of the commonly used OMs are not included in the available sources. This review is designed to provide up-to-date information on clinical suitability and psychometric properties of OMs used in individuals with LEA. We believe that this study will help healthcare professionals serving in the field of LEA and prosthetics to learn about and choose the appropriate OMs.

🔖

Cite This Article

YILDIZ, N. T., KOCAMAN, H., YAZICIOĞLU, F. G. (2021). Outcome measures used in lower extremity amputation: Review of clinical use and psychometric properties. Journal of Surgery and Medicine, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 5, 544–549. https://ajindex.com/articles/779956

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Gordon R, Magee C, Frazer A, Evans C, McCosker K. An interim prosthesis program for lower limb amputees: comparison of public and private models of service. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2010;34(2):175-83
  2. Liedberg E, Persson BM. Increased incidence of lower limb amputation for arterial occlusive disease. Acta Odontol. Scand. 1983;54(2):230-4
  3. Agrawal V. Clinical outcome measures for rehabilitation of amputees: a review. Phys Med Rehabil Int. 2016;3(2):1080-4
  4. Deathe B, Miller WC, Speechley M. The status of outcome measurement in amputee rehabilitation in Canada. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2002;83(7):912-8
  5. Ustun TB, Chatterji S, Bickenbach J, Kostanjsek N, Schneider M. The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: a new tool for understanding disability and health. Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25(11-12):565-71
  6. Kane RL. Approaching the outcomes question. In: Kane RL edt. Understanding health care outcomes research. 1st ed. Canada: Jones and Bartlett Publishers; 1997. pp. 1-15
  7. Daltroy LH, Larson MG, Eaton HM, Phillips CB, Liang MH. Discrepancies between self-reported and observed physical function in the elderly: the influence of response shift and other factors. Soc Sci Med. 1999;48(11):1549-61
  8. Reuben DB, Seeman TE, Keeler E, Hayes RP, Bowman L, Sewall A, et al. Refining the categorization of physical functional status: the added value of combining self-reported and performance-based measures. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2004;59(10):1056-61
  9. Heinemann AW, Connelly L, Ehrlich-Jones L, Fatone S. Outcome instruments for prosthetics: clinical applications. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2014;25(1):179-98
  10. Akturk Z, Acemoglu H. [Reliability and Validity in Medical Research]. Dicle Tıp Dergisi. 2012;39(2):316-9
  11. Hebert JS, Wolfe DL, Miller WC, Deathe AB, Devlin M, Pallaveshi L. Outcome measures in amputation rehabilitation: ICF body functions. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(19):1541-54
  12. Miller WC, Deathe AB, Speechley M. Psychometric properties of the activities-specific balance confidence scale among individuals with a lower-limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2003;84(5):656-61
  13. Sakakibara BM, Miller WC, Backman CL. Rasch analyses of the activities-specific balance confidence scale with individuals 50 years and older with lower-limb amputations. Arch Phys Med Rehab. 2011;92(8):1257-63
  14. Wong CK, Gibbs W, Chen ES. Use of the Houghton scale to classify community and household walking ability in people with lower-li