ArticleAdvances in rehabilitation science and practice
Qualitative Analysis of the Lived Experience of Individuals After Undergoing Osseointegration for Transfemoral Amputation.
Article in Advances in rehabilitation science and practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to qualitatively assess the first-hand lived experiences of patients with amputation who had transitioned from a traditional socket (TS) to Osseointegration (OI) to impact their overall quality of life (QOL) and function. Methods: This was a qualitative phenomenological study. Participants who had a unilateral transfemoral amputation and fit the study's inclusion criteria were interviewed in a semi-structured format regarding their quality of life and function before and after transitioning from a traditional socket (TS) to Osseointegration (OI). Responses were then analyzed through line-by-line coding to determine themes that were relevant to QOL outcomes for this study. Results: Eleven participants were interviewed in this study. The qualitative analysis demonstrated an emergence of 6 main themes consisting of "Improved Quality of Life," "Supportive Community," "Previous Ill-fitting Socket," "Greater Function," "Improved Osseo-perception," and "Promotion of Community Accessibility". Strengths included the use of an OI-specific quality of life assessment with adapted questions from validated outcome measures, international participants, and use of thematic analysis for data analysis. Weaknesses included sample size, niche participant population, and OI as a revision procedure only. More research is still necessary to explore/determine the benefits and detriments of Osseointegration as an alternative to traditional sockets for prosthetic devices. Conclusion: Individuals who have undergone Osseointegration procedure discuss being more satisfied with their prosthesis and quality of life when compared to their previous experience of a traditional socket. Impact Statement: This is a first of its kind study reporting on the lived experiences of those who have undergone OI. The field of amputation rehabilitation is expanding rapidly and knowing how this procedure impacts quality of life is important for healthcare professionals to understand as new frontiers are explored in this field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.