Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38714006›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of surgical research2024

Development of the AMPDECIDE Decision Aid to Facilitate Shared Decision Making in Patients Facing Amputation Secondary to Chronic Limb Threatening Ischemia.

Joseph M Czerniecki, Daniel Matlock, Alison W Henderson, Carly Rohs, Bjoern Suckow, Aaron P Turner, Daniel C Norvell

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of surgical research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. AMPREDICT Mobility-4: A Novel Four Category Mobility Outcome Prediction Model for Patients Undergoing Vascular Amputation.European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery · 2025
    Article
  2. AMPDECIDE amputation level patient decision aids: a feasibility study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2025
    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

7 authors.

Joseph M CzernieckiDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; CLiMB - Center for Limb Loss and Mobility, Seattle VA Medical Center, Seattle, Washington; VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington.
Daniel MatlockDepartments of Medicine and Geriatrics, University of Colorado, Denver, Colorado; VA Eastern Colorado Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, Denver, Colorado.
Alison W HendersonCLiMB - Center for Limb Loss and Mobility, Seattle VA Medical Center, Seattle, Washington; VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington. Electronic address: alison.henderson@va.gov.
Carly RohsVA Seattle - Denver COIN (Center of Innovation), Seattle, Washington & Denver, Colorado.
Bjoern SuckowSection of Vascular Surgery, Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire.
Aaron P TurnerDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; CLiMB - Center for Limb Loss and Mobility, Seattle VA Medical Center, Seattle, Washington; VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington.
Daniel C NorvellDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington; CLiMB - Center for Limb Loss and Mobility, Seattle VA Medical Center, Seattle, Washington; VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, Washington.

Funding

RRD VA I01 RX002960
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWe developed a patient decision aid to enhance patient participation in amputation level decision making when there is a choice between a transmetatarsal or transtibial amputation.

methodsIn accordance with International Patient Decision Aid Standards, we developed an amputation level patient decision aid for patients who are being considered for either a transmetatarsal or transtibial amputation, incorporating qualitative literature data, quantitative literature data, qualitative provider and patient interviews, expert panel input and iterative patient feedback.

resultsThe rapid qualitative literature review and qualitative interviews identified five domains outcome priority domains important to patients facing amputation secondary to chronic limb threatening ischemia: 1) the ability to walk, 2) healing and risk for reamputation, 3) rehabilitation program intensity, 4) ease of prosthetic use, and 5) limb length after amputation. The rapid quantitative review identified only two domains with adequate evidence comparing differences in outcomes between the two amputation levels: mobility and reamputation. Patient, surgeon, rehabilitation and decision aid expert feedback allowed us to integrate critical facets of the decision including addressing the emotional context of loss of limb, fear and anxiety as an obstacle to decision making, shaping the decision in the context of remaining life years, and how to facilitate patient knowledge of value tradeoffs.

conclusionsAmputation level choice is associated with significant outcome trade-offs. The AMPDECIDE patient decision aid can facilitate acknowledgment of patient fears, enhance knowledge of amputation level outcomes, assist patients in determining their personal outcome priorities, and facilitate shared amputation level decision making.

Indexed as

Amputation, SurgicalDecision Making, SharedDecision Support TechniquesChronic Limb-Threatening IschemiaFemaleHumansIschemiaMaleMiddle AgedPatient ParticipationAmputationChronic limb threatening ischemiaPatient decision aidShared decision making

Identifiers

PMID38714006
PMCPMC11831757

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.