Walking Ability and Quality of Life in Subjects With Transfemoral Amputation: A Comparison of Osseointegration With Socket Prostheses.

There is no fulltext present in this item.

Title:	Walking Ability and Quality of Life in Subjects With Transfemoral Amputation: A Comparison of Osseointegration With Socket Prostheses.
Author(s):	Meent, H. van de ; Hopman, M.T.E. ; Frolke, J.P.M.
Publication year:	2013
Source:	Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol. 94, iss. 11, (2013), pp. 2174-2178
ISSN:	0003-9993
DOI:	http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2013.05.020
Publication type:	Article / Letter to editor
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item : http://hdl.handle.net/2066/141664
Display more details
Subject:	NCEBP 10: Human Movement & Fatigue DCN PAC - Perception action and control NCEBP 14: Cardiovascular diseases IGMD 5: Health aging / healthy living NCEBP 2: Evaluation of complex medical interventions
Organization:	Rehabilitation Physiology Surgery
Journal title:	Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Volume:	vol. 94
Issue:	iss. 11
Page start:	p. 2174
Page end:	p. 2178
Abstract:	OBJECTIVE: To investigate walking ability and quality of life of osseointegrated leg prostheses compared with socket prostheses. DESIGN: Prospective case-control study. SETTING: University medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Subjects (N=22) with transfemoral amputation (1 bilateral) referred to our center because of socket-related skin and residual limb problems resulting in limited prosthesis use. Their mean age was 46.5 years (range, 23-67y) and mean time since amputation was 16.4 years (range, 2-45y). Causes of amputation were trauma (n=20) and tumor (n=2). INTERVENTION: Implantation of an osseointegration prosthesis (OIP). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Global score of the Questionnaire for Persons With a Transfemoral Amputation (Q-TFA), prosthesis use, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), Timed Up & Go (TUG) test, and oxygen consumption during treadmill walking. RESULTS: With the socket prosthesis, the mean +/- SD Q-TFA global score, prosthesis use, 6MWT, TUG, and oxygen consumption were 39+/-4.7 points, 56+/-7.9h/wk, 321+/-28m, 15.1+/-2.1 seconds, and 1330+/-310mL/min, respectively, and significantly improved with OIP to 63+/-5.3 points, 101+/-2.4h/wk, 423+/-21m, 8.1+/-0.7 seconds, and 1093+/-361mL/min, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Osseointegration is a suitable intervention for persons whose prosthesis use is reduced because of socket-related problems. Subjects with OIP significantly increased their walking ability and prosthesis-related quality of life.