Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39628638›Full record

ArticleCanadian prosthetics & orthotics journal2024

Detecting Changes in Comfort, Pain, and Mobility Over Clinical Milestones for Individuals With Lower Limb Loss.

B M Pousett, C C Harasym, M S Rapaport, T Richardson, J Spellen, D W Moe, W C Miller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. 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.

B M PousettBarber Prosthetics Clinic, Vancouver, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2272-7847
C C HarasymBiomechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
M S RapaportBarber Prosthetics Clinic, Vancouver, Canada.
T RichardsonBarber Prosthetics Clinic, Vancouver, Canada.
J SpellenBarber Prosthetics Clinic, Vancouver, Canada.
D W MoeBarber Prosthetics Clinic, Vancouver, Canada.
W C MillerG.F. Strong Rehabilitation Research Program & Department of Occupational Science and Therapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFunctional mobility, comfort and the absence of pain are key goals of prosthetic treatment. Outcome measures (OMs) evaluate the impact of treatment and normative and minimal detectable change (MDC) values are key to interpreting these scores and measuring treatment outcomes.

objectivesThis study seeks to 1) present practice-based normative values of four commonly used OMs at four prosthetic milestones and 2) explore the MDC of the measures over the treatment period. METHODOLOGY: A chart review was conducted of OMs collected with individuals with lower limb loss between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2023. This included data for individuals with unilateral transtibial (TT), transfemoral (TF) and rotationplasty (RP) amputations and bilateral transtibial amputation (BTT). OMs included the Socket Comfort Score (SCS), Pain Scale (PS), 2 Minute Walk Test (2MWT), and Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M). Data were collected at four milestone time points: (1) Baseline and (2) Discharge from Rehabilitation for those in initial prosthetic rehabilitation, and (3) Initial Evaluation and (4) Definitive Delivery for those receiving a replacement socket. Normative values and MDC values were calculated.

findingsData from 30 individuals undergoing in-patient rehabilitation and 74 individuals receiving a replacement socket were included. Practice-based normative data were different for each level of amputation and milestone and had the following ranges: SCS: 5.7 - 9.1, PS: 0.8 - 3.7, 2MWT: 68.4 - 146.3 m and PLUS-M: 38.9 - 57.3. MDC values also varied based on time in treatment (Rehabilitation: SCS = 2.5, PS = 1.6, 2MWT = 32.6, PLUS-M = 8.8; Replacement Socket: SCS = 3.1, PS = 2.6, 2MWT = 38.9, PLUS-M = 4.0). All measures had a statistically significant change over the intervention, however, no average scores changed by greater than the MDC.

conclusionsThe normative data and MDC scores demonstrate the PS & PLUS-M are useful measures of pain and mobility at all points within treatment. The 2MWT is indicated for individuals in rehabilitation, while the SCS is indicated for those receiving a replacement socket, as both effectively measure treatment goals that are particularly important for each phase of rehabilitation. This provides clinicians with practice-based evidence that enables them to interpret OM scores, a critical part of the decision-making process along the treatment journey.

Indexed as

2MWTAmputationFunctional MobilityLower Limb ProsthesisMobilityOutcome MeasurePainPLUS-MPractice-Based EvidenceProsthesisRehabilitationSocket Comfort

Identifiers

PMID39628638
PMCPMC11609942

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.