Activities of daily living in lower limb amputees with a bone-anchored prosthesis: a retrospective case series with 24 months' follow-up.
Journal
Acta orthopaedica
ISSN: 1745-3682
Titre abrégé: Acta Orthop
Pays: Sweden
ID NLM: 101231512
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 10 2023
10 10 2023
Historique:
received:
29
01
2023
medline:
1
11
2023
pubmed:
13
10
2023
entrez:
13
10
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Little is known about the activities of daily living (ADL) of patients with a bone-anchored prosthesis (BAP). We aimed to objectively measure ADL without and with BAP during standard care of follow-up. Our secondary aim was to measure mobility and walking ability. Patients aged 18-99 years who underwent surgery for transfemoral or transtibial BAP between September 11, 2017, and February 11, 2021, were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective case series of patients with socket prosthesis. ADL was measured with a continuous recording activity monitor (hours [h]) before surgery, and at 6, 12, and 24 months with BAP. Mobility and walking ability were assessed by the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) (seconds [s]) and 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT) (meters [m]), respectively. 48 of the 57 eligible patients provided informed consent and were included. Their age was 59 (1st quartile to 3rd quartile 51-63) years. Total daily activity before BAP was 1.6 h (0.82-2.1) and increased to 2.1 h (1.4-2.5) at 6, 2.0 h (1.5-2.7) at 12, and 2.7 h (2.0-3.3) at 24 months with BAP. Daily walking increased from 1.3 h (0.79-1.9) before BAP to 1.8 h (1.6-2.3) at 6, to 1.7 h (1.2-2.4) at 12, and 2.0 h (1.6-2.6) at 24 months. Median TUG decreased from 12 s (9.1-14) before BAP to 8.9 s (7.7-10) at 24 months. Mean 6MWT increased from 272 m (SD 92) before BAP to 348 m (SD 68) at 24 months. Objective measurements on ADL positively changed in patients with BAP. This effect was also seen in mobility and walking ability at 24 months.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Little is known about the activities of daily living (ADL) of patients with a bone-anchored prosthesis (BAP). We aimed to objectively measure ADL without and with BAP during standard care of follow-up. Our secondary aim was to measure mobility and walking ability.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
Patients aged 18-99 years who underwent surgery for transfemoral or transtibial BAP between September 11, 2017, and February 11, 2021, were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective case series of patients with socket prosthesis. ADL was measured with a continuous recording activity monitor (hours [h]) before surgery, and at 6, 12, and 24 months with BAP. Mobility and walking ability were assessed by the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) (seconds [s]) and 6 Minute Walk Test (6MWT) (meters [m]), respectively.
RESULTS
48 of the 57 eligible patients provided informed consent and were included. Their age was 59 (1st quartile to 3rd quartile 51-63) years. Total daily activity before BAP was 1.6 h (0.82-2.1) and increased to 2.1 h (1.4-2.5) at 6, 2.0 h (1.5-2.7) at 12, and 2.7 h (2.0-3.3) at 24 months with BAP. Daily walking increased from 1.3 h (0.79-1.9) before BAP to 1.8 h (1.6-2.3) at 6, to 1.7 h (1.2-2.4) at 12, and 2.0 h (1.6-2.6) at 24 months. Median TUG decreased from 12 s (9.1-14) before BAP to 8.9 s (7.7-10) at 24 months. Mean 6MWT increased from 272 m (SD 92) before BAP to 348 m (SD 68) at 24 months.
CONCLUSION
Objective measurements on ADL positively changed in patients with BAP. This effect was also seen in mobility and walking ability at 24 months.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37830879
doi: 10.2340/17453674.2023.19670
pmc: PMC10573365
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
499-504Références
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2004 Sep;41(5):695-706
pubmed: 15558399
Top Stroke Rehabil. 2020 Jul;27(5):337-343
pubmed: 31851872
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2001 Dec;25(3):186-94
pubmed: 11860092
J Tissue Viability. 2014 Aug;23(3):81-93
pubmed: 25193657
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2014 Mar;29(3):272-6
pubmed: 24351439
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Jan;88(1):109-14
pubmed: 17207685
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2010 Dec;34(4):472-87
pubmed: 20961183
BMJ Open. 2017 Mar 22;7(3):e013508
pubmed: 28336738
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 May;83(5):613-27
pubmed: 11994800
J Am Diet Assoc. 1995 Feb;95(2):215-8
pubmed: 7852688
J Eval Clin Pract. 2014 Aug;20(4):295-300
pubmed: 24798823
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995 Aug;76(8):736-43
pubmed: 7632129
Behav Res Methods Instrum Comput. 2001 Aug;33(3):349-56
pubmed: 11591066
Bone Joint J. 2020 Feb;102-B(2):162-169
pubmed: 32009427
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1982 May 29;284(6329):1607-8
pubmed: 6805625
J Clin Epidemiol. 2008 Apr;61(4):344-9
pubmed: 18313558
Disabil Rehabil. 2017 Jun;39(11):1045-1058
pubmed: 27494092
Bone Joint J. 2020 Jan;102-B(1):55-63
pubmed: 31888375
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Oct;88(10):1314-9
pubmed: 17908575
Diabet Med. 2011 Oct;28(10):1144-53
pubmed: 21388445
J Rehabil Assist Technol Eng. 2020 Mar 16;7:2055668319890535
pubmed: 32206335
Bone Joint J. 2021 Mar;103-B(3):430-439
pubmed: 33641410
Prosthet Orthot Int. 2010 Mar;34(1):85-97
pubmed: 20196690
J Orthop Trauma. 2018 Feb;32(2):e64-e75
pubmed: 29373379