A MIXED-METHODS STUDY ON PROSTHESIS USE AMONG OLDER CANADIANS WITH LOWER-LIMB AMPUTATIONS
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of lower-limb amputations (LLA) in older adults is increasing. Due to the substantial resources required for rehabilitation, there is growing interest in exploring prosthesis use as well as the factors that impact use for individuals with LLA. OBJECTIVES: To examine how older adults, those over 50 years old, with a new LLA use their prostheses following rehabilitation and to identify factors that increase or decrease prosthesis use after discharge from a rehabilitation hospital. METHODS: The StepWatch Activity Monitor, the Prosthetic Profile of the Amputee Questionnaire, and a semi-structured interview were used to measure prosthesis use and factors affecting use at 12 weeks post-discharge from a rehabilitation hospital. Descriptive statistics were calculated for the quantitative data and the qualitative interviews were analyzed using the International Classification of Functioning and Disability. RESULTS: Two user profiles emerged from the 11 participants’ use patterns. The Regular Users integrated their prosthesis into their lives, using it for various types of activities, while the Strategic Users wore their prosthesis to perform specific activities of daily and instrumental activities of daily living tasks. Body functions (e.g., pain), personal (e.g., feeling of independence), and environmental factors (e.g., home adaptations or social support) impacted prosthesis use. CONCLUSIONS: The emergence of profiles suggests variability in how older adults with LLA use their prosthesis after rehabilitation. However, the factors affecting prosthesis use were similar between the profiles. Therefore, while it is important for rehabilitation teams to consider patients’ individual needs when setting goals for prosthetic training, they must also consider common factors affecting prosthesis use. Layman's Abstract The prevalence of lower-limb amputations (LLA) in older adults is increasing. Because of the substantial resources rehabilitation demands, there is growing interest in exploring prosthesis use as well as the factors that impact use for individuals with LLA. In this study we examine how adults over the age of 50 with LLA use their prosthesis after rehabilitation. We also identify factors that increase or decrease prosthesis use after leaving a rehabilitation hospital. We used several measures to study prosthesis use. The StepWatch Activity Monitor, the Prosthetic Profile of the Amputee Questionnaire, and a semi-structured interview were all used to measure prosthesis use after 12 weeks from leaving a rehabilitation hospital. Two user profiles emerged from our data. The Regular Users integrated their prosthesis into their lives, using it for various types of activities, while the Strategic Users wore their prosthesis to perform specific ADL and IADL tasks. Body functions (e.g., pain), personal (e.g., feeling of independence), and environmental factors (e.g., home adaptations or social support) impacted prosthesis use. Our findings suggest there is variability in how older adults with LLA use their prosthesis after rehabilitation. However, the factors affecting prosthesis use were similar between the profiles. Therefore, while it is important for rehabilitation teams to consider patients’ individual needs when setting goals for prosthetic training, they must also consider common factors affecting prosthesis use. Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/36833/28219 How To Cite: Pousett B, Budzinski C, Labbé D, Miller WC. A mixed-methods study on prosthesis use among older Canadians with lower-limb amputations. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021;Volume 4, Issue 1, No.10. https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i1.36833 Corresponding Author: William C Miller,University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia (BC), Canada. E-Mail: bill.miller@ubc.caORCID: https://orcid.org/ 0000-0003-3060-0210
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».