MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167217987 · doi:10.33137/cpoj.v4i1.36065

CLINICAL OUTCOME OF TRANSFEMORAL DIRECT SOCKET INTERFACE (PART 2)

2021· article· en· W3167217987 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Joel Walker, W. Russ Marable, Christian Smith, Benedikt Þorri Sigurjónsson, Ingi Freyr Atlason, Anton Johannesson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutcome (game theory)Interface (matter)Computer scienceMedicineHuman–computer interactionOperating systemMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Amputation at the transfemoral (TF) level reduces the rate of successful prosthetic fitting, functional outcome, and quality of life (QoL) compared with transtibial amputation. The TF socket interface is considered the most critical part of the prosthesis, but socket discomfort is still the most common user complaint. Direct Socket for transfemoral prosthesis users is a novel interface fabrication process where the socket is shaped and laminated directly on the residual limb and delivered in a single visit. OBJECTIVE(S): The aim of this study was to investigate if prosthetic users' quality of life (QoL), comfort, and mobility with a Direct Socket TF interface were comparable to their experience with their previous prostheses. METHODOLOGY: The pre/post design prospective cohort study included 47 subjects. From this cohort, 36 subjects completed the 6-months follow-up (mean age 58 years, 27 males). Outcomes at baseline included EQ-5D-5L®, PLUS-M™, CLASS, ABC, AMPPRO, and TUG. At 6-weeks and 6-months, subjects repeated all measures. Seven Certified Prosthetist (CP) investigators performed observations and data collection at six different sites (from July 2018 to April 2020). FINDINGS: Results showed significant improvement in all outcome measures for the 36 subjects that completed both 6-weeks and 6-months follow-ups. CLASS sub-scales showed significantly improved stability, suspension, comfort, and socket appearance. Improvement in K-Level and less use of assistive devices were observed with the AMPPRO instrument, indicating improved user mobility and performance. QoL was also increased, as measured in Quality-Adjusted-Life-Years (QALY) from the EQ-5D-5L. CONCLUSION: Evidence from the findings demonstrate that the Direct Socket TF system and procedure can be a good alternative to the traditional method of prosthetic interface delivery. Layman's Abstract After lower limb amputation, the goal for most people is to regain mobility and independence and return to normal daily activities. Typically, people with transfemoral amputation are less likely to receive a prosthesis or fully use a prosthesis as compared to people with transtibial amputation. Moreover, their quality of life is also lower. The Direct Socket TF method is a new way of fabricating a prosthetic socket for users with above-knee amputation, enabling fabrication directly onto the residual limb and delivery of the socket in a single visit. In this study, we wanted to understand how the effect of Direct Socket TF on prosthetic 'user's quality of life, health, mobility level, and balance would compare to their previous prosthesis. This new Direct Socket TF procedure was implemented in six different prosthetic clinics across the United States and used by 36 prosthetic users for six months. Our first article on this study describes increased user satisfaction with their new interface and the single visit service model. This second article on the same clinical investigation documents the significant improvement in outcomes compared to their original interface in terms of quality of life, confidence, mobility, comfort, stability, and activity level. Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/36065/27923 Direct Socket TF – Summary (YouTube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fvVFqjgxjo How To Cite: Walker J, Marable W.R, Smith C, Sigurjónsson B.Þ, Atlason I.F, Johannesson G.A. Clinical outcome of transfemoral direct socket interface (part 2). Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021;Volume 4, Issue 1, No.6. https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i1.36065 Corresponding Author: Anton Johannesson, PhDTeamOlmed, Kistagången 12, 164 40 Kista, Stockholm, Sweden.E-mail: ajohannesson@teamolmed.seORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8729-458X

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.962

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.262 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Prosthetics & Orthotics JournalSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207