Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37614931›Full record

ArticleCanadian prosthetics & orthotics journal2021

Clinical Outcomes Comparing Two Prosthetic Knee Designs in Individuals with Unilateral Transfemoral Amputation in Turkey.

A Yazgan, S Kutlutürk, K Lechler

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 56% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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 2 institutions in 2 countries.

A YazganOrthotics - Prosthetics Master of Science Program, Graduate School of Healthy Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0744-503X
S KutlutürkDepartment of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, School of Healthy Sciences, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.
K LechlerÖssur Medical Office, R&D Össur ehf, Reykjavik, Iceland.
Istanbul Medipol University · TRÖssur (Iceland) · IS

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundClinical outcome assessments provide important input for the rehabilitation of individuals with transfemoral amputation. Differences in prosthetic knee designs may influence clinical outcomes.

objectivesThe aim of this study was to compare functional mobility, balance, prosthetic satisfaction and quality of life in individuals with unilateral transfemoral amputation with microprocessor-controlled (MPK) and non-microprocessor knee designs (Non-MPK). METHODOLOGY: The study included ten experienced MPK (Rheo Knee) users (Group 1) and ten experienced Non-MPK (Total Knee

findings6MWT results of the MPK group were significantly higher than Non-MPK group (p<0.05). In the MPK group a strong negative correlation was found between the FSST and the 6MWT (r=-0.661, p=0.038). No statistically significant differences were found between the groups (p>0.05) comparing balance, prosthesis satisfaction and quality of life values.

conclusionThe findings will inform about the patient's prognosis and the expected clinical outcomes when prescribing an MPK or an Non-MPK. Individuals with unilateral transfemoral amputation covered longer distances using an MPK compared to Non-MPK.

Indexed as

BalanceFunctional MobilityProsthesisProsthetic SatisfactionQuality of LifeTransfemoral Amputation

Identifiers

PMID37614931
PMCPMC10443503
OpenAlexW3175148505

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.