Rasch validation of the Prosthetic Mobility Questionnaire: A new outcome measure for assessing mobility in people with lower limb amputation

Background: The International Classification of Function, Disability and Health (ICF) has been promoted for use in clinical practice but few articles have demonstrated that it can be used as a sensitive outcome measure, and there has been no published evidence that it can be used for individuals following a lower limb amputation. We developed an ICF-based checklist for individuals who had an amputation. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of this checklist in detecting meaningful changes of function and quality of life in persons following an amputation using the ICF qualifiers as an outcome measure. Study Design: Time series study. Methods: Twenty patients were rated on the ICF checklist items for four time points; preadmission status, one week post-amputation, on discharge from the acute hospital and three months post-amputation. Results: Seventeen patients completed the full study, having data collected at each of the four time points. Using the ICF checklist, we could demonstrate a significant functional deterioration immediately after amputation with a gradual improvement in function over the following three weeks consistent with our direct observations of these patients. Conclusions: The ICF checklist has the potential to be used as an outcome instrument as it appears to have content validity and sensitivity as a measure of changes in patients following an amputation. Clinical relevance Clinical outcome measures based on the ICF potentially improve the ability to record, monitor and benchmark patient and treatment outcomes nationally and internationally. This paper addresses the feasibility of ICF categories and qualifiers when used as an outcome measure and indicates that further development and analysis of the psychometric properties of such measures is warranted.

Download Full-text

Metric Charcteristics of Sit-to-stand Tests in Patients After Lower-limb Amputation

Case Medical Research ◽

10.31525/ct1-nct04293237 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Keyword(s):

Lower Limb ◽

Lower Limb Amputation ◽

Limb Amputation ◽

Sit To Stand

Download Full-text

Prostheses and orthoses. Factors to be considered when specifying a prosthesis for a person who has had a lower limb amputation

10.3403/30178636 ◽

2009 ◽

Keyword(s):

Lower Limb ◽

Lower Limb Amputation ◽

Limb Amputation

Download Full-text

Prostheses and orthoses. Factors to be included when describing physical activity of a person who has had a lower limb amputation(s) or who has a deficiency of a lower limb segment(s) present at birth

10.3403/30178633u ◽

2015 ◽

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Lower Limb ◽

Lower Limb Amputation ◽

Limb Amputation ◽

Limb Segment

Download Full-text

Prostheses and orthoses. Factors to be included when describing physical activity of a person who has had a lower limb amputation(s) or who has a deficiency of a lower limb segment(s) present at birth

10.3403/30178633 ◽

2009 ◽

Keyword(s):

Physical Activity ◽

Lower Limb ◽

Lower Limb Amputation ◽

Limb Amputation ◽

Limb Segment

Download Full-text

P90 PERCEIVE: PrEdiction of Risk and Communication of outcome following major lower limb amputation - a collaboratIVE study

BJS Open ◽

10.1093/bjsopen/zrab032.089 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽

Author(s):

B Gwilym ◽

C Waldron ◽

E Thomas-Jones ◽

P Pallmann ◽

R Preece ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Prediction ◽

Lower Limb ◽

Health Care Professionals ◽

Healthcare Professionals ◽

Demographic Data ◽

Collaborative Study ◽

Lower Limb Amputation ◽

Research Network ◽

Limb Amputation ◽

Prediction Tools

Abstract Introduction Major Lower Limb Amputation (MLLA) is a life changing event with significant morbidity and mortality. Inaccurate risk prediction can lead to poor decision making, resulting in delay to definitive surgery, or undertaking amputation when not in the patient’s best interest. We aim to answer: In adult patients undergoing MLLA for chronic limb threatening ischaemia or diabetes, how accurately do health care professionals prospectively predict outcomes after MLLA, and how does this compare to existing prediction tools? Methods A multicentre prospective observational cohort study is being delivered through the Vascular and Endovascular Research Network. Dissemination was via an existing network of contacts and social media. Consecutive data will be collected for seven months from site launch date, including demographic data and pre-operative outcome predictions from surgeons, anaesthetists, and allied healthcare professionals. Follow-up data will comprise 30-day (mortality, morbidity, MLLA revision, surgical site infection, and blood transfusion) and 1-year (mortality, MLLA revision and ambulation). The accuracy of surgeons’ predictions will be evaluated and compared to pre-existing risk prediction scoring tools. Results PERCEIVE launched on 01/10/2020 with 23 centres (16 UK, 7 international) registered to collect data. 50 other centres (27 UK, 23 international) have expressed interest/are pursuing local audit/ethical approval. We aim to collect data on clinicians estimate of outcomes for over 500 patients. Discussion This study will utilise a trainee research network to provide data on the accuracy of healthcare professionals’ predictions of outcomes following MLLA and compare this to the utility of existing prediction tools in this patient cohort.

Download Full-text