Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30350430›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2018

Prosthetic rehabilitation for older dysvascular people following a unilateral transfemoral amputation.

Steven Barr, Tracey E Howe

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07652619 (Motor Imagery Prior to or Alongside Initial Prosthetic Gait Training in Acute Transtibial Amputees), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07652619 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Motor Imagery Prior to or Alongside Initial Prosthetic Gait Training in Acute Transtibial Amputees: A Feasibility Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorAriel UniversityRan2023 to 2023Enrolled10ConditionsTranstibial Amputation - Unilateral, Transtibial Amputation, Transtibial AmputeeArmsMotor Imagery
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Steven BarrSchool of Health and Social Care, University of Teesside, Middlesbrough, Tees Valley, UK, TS1 3BA.
Tracey E Howe

Funding

Chief Scientist Office CZB/4/788Chief Scientist Office ETM/442
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDysvascularity accounts for 75% of all lower limb amputations in the UK. Around 37% of these procedures are done at the transfemoral level (mid-thigh), with most patients over the age of 60 and having existing comorbidities. A significant number of these amputees are prescribed a lower limb prosthesis for walking. However, many amputees do not achieve a high level of function following prosthetic rehabilitation. This is the third update of the review first published in 2005.

objectivesTo identify and summarise the evidence evaluating prosthetic rehabilitation interventions for prosthetic ambulation following unilateral transfemoral or transgenicular amputation in older dysvascular people, whether community dwelling or institutionalised. SEARCH

methodsThe Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register and CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases; the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; and the ClinicalTrials.gov trials registry to 14 June 2018. We performed additional searches by handsearching citations of studies identified by the electronic search. We applied no restrictions on language or publication status. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials testing prosthetic rehabilitation interventions following a unilateral transfemoral or transgenicular amputation in older (aged 60 years or older) dysvascular people. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently scanned the search results for potentially eligible studies and, on obtaining full reports of these, selected studies for inclusion and exclusion. Two review authors independently assessed the methodological quality of studies and extracted data. We used GRADE to assess the overall quality of evidence supporting the outcomes assessed in this review. MAIN

resultsWe identified no new studies for inclusion in this update. In total we included one trial, excluded 18 trials, classed one trial as ongoing, and classed another as awaiting classification. The total number of participants in the included trial was 10, and the methodological quality of this trial was moderate because of high risk of bias in relation to two domains (random sequence generation and allocation concealment) but low risk of bias for the four remaining domains (blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and any other bias). The included trial was a short-term cross-over randomised trial undertaken in Canada, which tested the effects of adding three seemingly identical prosthetic weights (150 g vs 770 g vs 1625 g) to the prostheses of a total of 10 participants with unilateral dysvascular transfemoral amputation. Eight participants were over 60 years of age. Trial authors found that four participants preferred the addition of the lightest weight (150 g), five preferred the middle weight (770 g), and one preferred the heaviest weight (1625 g). Researchers interpreted this as equating to user satisfaction (success) and reported no adverse effects. AUTHORS'

conclusionsThe limited evidence presented in this review is of very low quality and is insufficient to inform the choice of prosthetic rehabilitation, including the optimum weight of the prosthesis, after unilateral transfemoral amputation in older dysvascular people. A programme of research that includes randomised controlled trials to examine key interventions is urgently required in this area.

Indexed as

AgedAmputation, SurgicalArtificial LimbsFemurHumansLegMiddle AgedPatient SatisfactionRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID30350430
PMCPMC6953320

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.