Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34748757›Full record

ArticleArchives of physical medicine and rehabilitation2022

Measurements of Best, Worst, and Average Socket Comfort Are More Reliable Than Current Socket Comfort in Established Lower Limb Prosthesis Users.

Sara J Morgan, Robert L Askew, Brian J Hafner

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07075042 (Comparing the Attentional Demands and Functional Outcomes of Pattern Recognition and Direct Myoelectric Control in People With Transradial Amputation), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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.

NCT07075042 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

Comparing the Attentional Demands and Functional Outcomes of Pattern Recognition and Direct Myoelectric Control in People With Transradial Amputation

TypeinterventionalSponsorVirginia Commonwealth UniversityRan2026 to 2027Enrolled32ConditionsAmputation, Prosthesis UseArmsTraining with PRC, Training with DC, PRC Device use in community and home, DC Device use in community and home
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sara J MorganGillette Children's Specialty Healthcare, St. Paul, Minnesota; University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Robert L AskewStetson University, DeLand, Florida.
Brian J HafnerDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Electronic address: bhafner@uw.edu.
Stetson University · USUniversity of Minnesota System · USUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

A Client-Based Outcome System for Individuals with Lower Limb AmputationR01HD065340 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI HAFNER, BRIAN J · 2014 to 2022
$2.7M
A Client-Based Outcome System for Individuals with Lower Limb AmputationU01HD065340 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI HAFNER, BRIAN J · 2010 to 2013
$2.0M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD065340NICHD NIH HHS U01 HD065340
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate test-retest reliability and related measurement properties of items developed to assess best, worst, and average prosthetic socket comfort.

designMethodological research to assess test-retest reliability of 4 individual socket comfort survey items. Socket comfort items were included in a self-report paper survey, which was administered to participants 2 to 3 days apart.

settingGeneral community.

participantsA minimum convenience sample of participants (N=63) was targeted for this study; 72 lower limb prosthesis users (>1y postamputation) completed the survey and were included in the final dataset.

interventionsNot applicable.

main outcome measureThe expanded socket comfort score (ESCS) was adapted from the original socket comfort score (SCS). The original SCS is a single-item self-report instrument developed to assess a lower limb prosthesis user's current socket comfort. Three additional items were designed to assess the user's best, worst, and average socket comfort over the previous 7 days.

resultsBest, worst, and average socket comfort items demonstrated better reliability, as indicated by higher intraclass correlation coefficients. As such, these items also exhibited lower measurement error and smaller minimal detectable change values than the item that measured current socket comfort. However, test-retest coefficients for all 4 ESCS items were below the level desired for evaluation of within-individual changes of socket comfort.

conclusionsItems that assess best, worst, and average comfort provide a more stable measurement of socket fit than the existing SCS instrument. Although administration of all 4 ESCS items may provide more comprehensive assessment of a lower limb prosthesis user's socket fit, administrators should expect variations in scores over time owing to the variable nature of the underlying construct over time. Future research should examine whether the ESCS provides an improved overall assessment of socket fit.

Indexed as

AmputeesArtificial LimbsHumansProsthesis DesignReproducibility of ResultsSelf ReportSurveys and QuestionnairesAmputeesArtificial limbsHealth surveysOutcome assessment (health care)RehabilitationReproducibility of resultsSurveys and questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID34748757
PMCPMC9072595
OpenAlexW3213049695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.