ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2024
Virtual Assessment of Functional Mobility in Lower Extremity Prosthesis Clients: An Exploratory Study.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 2024. 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: To investigate the relationship between patient perception of lower extremity function and a home-based virtual clinician assessment of mobility in lower limb prosthesis clients. Design: Descriptive observational study using a clinician-administered functional mobility survey and timed Up and Go test to assess lower extremity function under supervision. Setting: Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act-compliant online virtual platform. Participants: Twelve lower limb loss clients currently using prostheses, aged ≥19 years, not pregnant, and with no stroke, seizure disorder, or cancer. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Main outcomes were mobility survey scores and mean timed Up and Go duration. Results: Most participants reported significant ease of completing basic indoor ambulation and toileting tasks (66%-75%) and significant difficulty in running or prolonged ambulation activities (83%) requiring use of lower limb prosthesis. Timed Up and Go test was faster (11.0±2.9 s) than the reference range for transtibial prosthesis users and negatively associated with self-reported lower extremity functional status ( Conclusions: Self-reported movement with lower limb prostheses at home and evaluation of mobility via a virtual platform is a feasible assessment modality that may reduce the frequency of therapy visits, defray some rehabilitation costs, and minimize the travel burden to distant prosthetic clinics.
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.