Trial reportBMJ open2026
Prosthetist screening for comorbidity during routine care visits: a randomised controlled clinical trial evaluating benefits, acceptability and feasibility.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05410548 (Can Comorbidity Screening and Referral by Prosthetists Enhance Post-Amputation Care?), which is not on this 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.
Can Comorbidity Screening and Referral by Prosthetists Enhance Post-Amputation Care?
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesComorbidity among adults with lower-limb amputation exceeds that in the general population and contributes to poor outcomes. The primary objectives of this clinical trial were to explore benefits, acceptability and feasibility of comorbidity screening by prosthetists during routine follow-up visits. Our primary hypothesis was that when compared with standard-of-care (SOC) follow-up visits, standard-of-care + comorbidity screening (SOC+) would result in greater patient satisfaction and reduced prosthetic care minutes.
designRandomised controlled clinical trial with mixed-methods approach. SETTINGS: Prosthetic clinical practices.
participants70 adults with unilateral lower-limb amputation.
interventionsParticipants were randomly assigned to receive SOC or SOC+, which included assessment for depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, moderate-to-high risk low back pain, lack of pedal pulses suggestive of peripheral arterial disease and lack of protective sensation suggestive of peripheral neuropathy. Screening results were reviewed with participants and faxed to primary care with telephone follow-ups when indicated. Prosthetists participated in a focus group. Healthcare utilisation over the subsequent 3 months was tracked. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient satisfaction surveys and care utilisation.
resultsFew adverse events and protocol deviations occurred; intervention fidelity was >95%. There were no significant between-group differences in overall patient satisfaction, prosthetic care utilisation over the subsequent 3 months, nor initial prosthetic care visit length (p>0.050). Item-by-item analysis found participants rated prosthetist responsiveness to concerns higher with SOC+ (p=0.046, r=0.251). Prosthetists identified benefits from screening. Screening prompted positive healthcare seeking behaviours in this vulnerable population.
conclusionsComorbidity screening by prosthetists appears feasible and acceptable. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05410548.
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.