ABSTRACT
Introduction
Amputations secondary to high-energy open fractures and blast, ballistic, and crush injuries to the lower extremity are common challenges faced by military and civilian orthopaedic surgeons. A lack of consensus on domains to be measured and quality of prosthetic rendering pose methodological challenges to researchers and clinicians alike. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to summarize which domains of health, prosthetic fit, and prosthetic alignment are used to describe outcomes for lower extremity amputees secondary to trauma.
Materials and methods
A search of PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase was conducted including the keywords: Amputation, traumatic, transtibial, survey, and metric. Articles were selected based on whether the study assessed clinical outcomes following transtibial amputation following trauma. Experimental and observational comparative studies and case series were included. Study characteristics and results were extracted using standardized data forms. The number of unique measures recorded, the frequency of measure use, and the number outcome measures were validated and were compiled.
Results
Literature search ultimately resulted in 273 articles being included. A conceptual model was constructed to capture and organize the causal and temporal relationships between fit, alignment, and outcome. Of the 68 articles that used questionnaires to assess prosthetic fit, 37 used a questionnaire designed specifically for the study as opposed to a published or validated tool. Four validated tools were commonly used to capture patient satisfaction with a prosthesis: The OPUS, PEQ, TAPES, and the Socket Comfort Fit Score. Prosthetic alignment was assessed in 19 of 273 articles. One article validated the use of an alignment jig for quantification and prescription of prostheses. Totally, 8 of 19 articles assessing alignment used gait analysis and ground reaction forces to capture differences due to alterations in alignment.
Discussion
Choice of an appropriate outcome measure is critical in generating evidence to support treatment decisions for patients undergoing transtibial amputation after trauma. We found a large number of different tools being used across studies, making results difficult to compare. Prosthetic fit and comfort of the residual limb in the socket and the alignment of the socket and the shank of the prosthesis make up the foundation for the proposed conceptual model. In order to distinguish effects attributable to an intervention of interest vs the impact of the quality of the socket fitting, validation of a clinically objective scoring system to assess socket fit is necessary.
Conclusion
A large number of different tools are currently being used across studies to assess outcomes for transtibial amputees resulting from trauma, and there is a need for development and validation of a clinically objective scoring system to assess socket fit.
Baumgartner R, Morshed S. Assessment Measures for Evaluation of Outcomes in Transtibial Amputees resulting from Trauma: A Systematic Review. The Duke Orthop J 2017;7(1):23-29.
A systematic review of variables used to assess clinically acceptable alignment of unilateral transtibial amputees in the literature
