Perspectives on ankle-foot technology for improving gait performance of children with Cerebral Palsy in daily-life: requirements, needs and wishes.
Ankle-foot orthosis
Assistive technology
Cerebral Palsy
Daily-life
Gait
Journal
Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation
ISSN: 1743-0003
Titre abrégé: J Neuroeng Rehabil
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101232233
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 04 2023
12 04 2023
Historique:
received:
18
05
2022
accepted:
30
03
2023
medline:
14
4
2023
entrez:
12
4
2023
pubmed:
13
4
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) are extensively used as a primary management method to assist ambulation of children with Cerebral Palsy (CP). However, there are certain barriers that hinder their prescription as well as their use as a mobility device in all kinds of daily-life activities. This exploratory research attempts to further understand the existing limitations of current AFOs to promote a better personalization of new design solutions. Stakeholders' (professionals in CP and end-users with CP) perspectives on AFO technology were collected by two online surveys. Respondents evaluated the limitations of current assistive solutions and assessment methods, provided their expectations for a new AFO design, and analyzed the importance of different design features and metrics to enrich the gait performance of these patients in daily-life. Quantitative responses were rated and compared with respect to their perceived importance. Qualitative responses were classified into themes by using content analysis. 130 survey responses from ten countries were analyzed, 94 from professionals and 36 from end-users with CP. The most highly rated design features by both stakeholder groups were the comfort and the ease of putting on and taking off the assistive device. In general, professionals preferred new features to enrich the independence of the patient by improving gait at functional levels. End-users also considered their social acceptance and participation. Health care professionals reported a lack of confidence concerning decision-making about AFO prescription. To some degree, this may be due to the reported inconsistent understanding of the type of assistance required for each pathological gait. Thus, they indicated that more information about patients' day-to-day walking performance would be beneficial to assess patients' capabilities. This study emphasizes the importance of developing new approaches to assess and treat CP gait in daily-life situations. The stakeholders' needs and criteria reported here may serve as insights for the design of future assistive devices and for the follow-up monitoring of these patients.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) are extensively used as a primary management method to assist ambulation of children with Cerebral Palsy (CP). However, there are certain barriers that hinder their prescription as well as their use as a mobility device in all kinds of daily-life activities. This exploratory research attempts to further understand the existing limitations of current AFOs to promote a better personalization of new design solutions.
METHODS
Stakeholders' (professionals in CP and end-users with CP) perspectives on AFO technology were collected by two online surveys. Respondents evaluated the limitations of current assistive solutions and assessment methods, provided their expectations for a new AFO design, and analyzed the importance of different design features and metrics to enrich the gait performance of these patients in daily-life. Quantitative responses were rated and compared with respect to their perceived importance. Qualitative responses were classified into themes by using content analysis.
RESULTS
130 survey responses from ten countries were analyzed, 94 from professionals and 36 from end-users with CP. The most highly rated design features by both stakeholder groups were the comfort and the ease of putting on and taking off the assistive device. In general, professionals preferred new features to enrich the independence of the patient by improving gait at functional levels. End-users also considered their social acceptance and participation. Health care professionals reported a lack of confidence concerning decision-making about AFO prescription. To some degree, this may be due to the reported inconsistent understanding of the type of assistance required for each pathological gait. Thus, they indicated that more information about patients' day-to-day walking performance would be beneficial to assess patients' capabilities.
CONCLUSION
This study emphasizes the importance of developing new approaches to assess and treat CP gait in daily-life situations. The stakeholders' needs and criteria reported here may serve as insights for the design of future assistive devices and for the follow-up monitoring of these patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37046284
doi: 10.1186/s12984-023-01162-3
pii: 10.1186/s12984-023-01162-3
pmc: PMC10099972
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
44Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Biomed Eng Online. 2021 Sep 6;20(1):89
pubmed: 34488777
Qual Health Res. 2005 Nov;15(9):1277-88
pubmed: 16204405
Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2020 Feb;31(1):69-89
pubmed: 31760995
Gait Posture. 2007 Apr;25(4):580-9
pubmed: 16876416
NeuroRehabilitation. 2011;28(1):37-46
pubmed: 21335676
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2023 Apr 1;47(2):147-154
pubmed: 35833742
Disabil Rehabil. 2021 Mar;43(5):726-738
pubmed: 31248284
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2018 Jun 19;15(1):51
pubmed: 29914523
JAMA Pediatr. 2017 Sep 1;171(9):897-907
pubmed: 28715518
Pediatr Phys Ther. 2015 Fall;27(3):218-26
pubmed: 26035652
Gait Posture. 2007 Jan;25(1):140-52
pubmed: 16490354
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2004 Jan 30;53(3):57-9
pubmed: 14749614
Gait Posture. 2015 Feb;41(2):586-91
pubmed: 25604121
Gait Posture. 2022 Jan;91:165-178
pubmed: 34736095
PLoS One. 2015 Nov 23;10(11):e0142878
pubmed: 26600039
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2021 Nov 10;18(1):163
pubmed: 34758857
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 Mar;86(2):251-8
pubmed: 15046442
EFORT Open Rev. 2016 Dec 22;1(12):448-460
pubmed: 28698802
Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2020 May;26:68-74
pubmed: 32147412
Sci Rep. 2020 Feb 7;10(1):2091
pubmed: 32034244
Res Dev Disabil. 2018 Sep;80:93-101
pubmed: 29981952
ScientificWorldJournal. 2014;2014:867869
pubmed: 24892102
Gait Posture. 2019 Mar;69:101-111
pubmed: 30708092
Eur J Neurol. 2001 Nov;8 Suppl 5:98-108
pubmed: 11851738
Joint Bone Spine. 2011 Jul;78(4):335-6
pubmed: 21742532
Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2020 Jul 14;8:812
pubmed: 32766230
Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2019;39(3):237-253
pubmed: 29702012
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2022 May;64(5):536-549
pubmed: 34549424
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Dec 19;11:169
pubmed: 25523497
Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010 Mar;52(3):264-9
pubmed: 20089048