Amputasyonu Olan Bireylerin Protez Farkındalıkları ve İlgili Memnuniyetleri: Kesitsel Araştırma

Year 2025, Volume: 14 Issue: 3, 564 - 573, 31.10.2025

Senay Cerezci Duygu

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı; edinilmiş protez bakımı, bilgi kaynakları, protez karar verme süreci, pozitif-negatif algı kaynakları, algılanan farkındalığı içeren protez farkındalığını araştırmak ve bunların protez memnuniyeti ile ilişkisini belirlemektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: Kesitsel türdeki çalışmanın örneklemi alt ekstremite amputasyonu olan ve K3 veya K4 fonksiyonel ambulasyon seviyesine sahip bireylerden oluşmakta idi. Ampute bireylerin protez farkındalıkları sorgulandı ve mevcut protezlerinden memnuniyet düzeylerini belirlemek için Protez Memnuniyet Anketi (PMA) uygulandı. Bulgular: Altmış-üç katılımcı çalışmaya dahil edildi (Yaş: 406±1.16 yıl). Ortalama PMA skoru 71.53±11.2 idi. Eğitim düzeyi veya amputasyon düzeyine göre oluşturulan gruplar arasında memnuniyet puanları açısından fark yoktu (sırasıyla p=0.101; p=0.256). Algılanan farkındalık düzeyini değerlendiren farklı ifadeler için yapılan ikili grup karşılaştırmalarında, protez memnuniyetinin protez farkındalığı yüksek olan grup lehine daha iyi olduğu tespit edildi (p<0.05). Sonuç: Protez uzmanının protez bilgisinin temel kaynağı olması, protez uzmanının mesleki becerilerinin ve uzman tavsiyesinin algılanan önemi, protez rehabilitasyonunda profesyonellerin bilgi ve deneyiminin önemini göstermektedir. Hem ampute bireylerde hem de toplumda protez farkındalığının artırılması, protez memnuniyeti gibi temel sonuçların iyileştirilmesi için faydalı olacaktır.

Keywords

ampute , protez , rehabilitasyon , memnuniyet , farkındalık

Ethical Statement

Kurum: Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi Gülhane Bilimsel Araştırmalar Etik Kurulu Tarih: 28.06.2024 Karar No: 2024-368

Project Number

2024-368

Prosthetic Awareness and Related Satisfaction of Individuals with Amputation: A Cross-Sectional Study

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the prosthetic awareness including the acquired prosthetic care, information sources, prosthetic decision-making process, positive-negative perception sources, perceived awareness, and determine their relationship with prosthetic satisfaction. Methods: The sample of the cross-sectional study consisted of individuals with lower extremity amputation, and K3 or K4 functional ambulation level. The prosthetic awareness of the amputees was questioned and the Satisfaction with Prosthesis Questionnaire (SAT-PRO) was applied to determine their satisfaction level with their current prosthesis. Results: Sixty-three participants were included the study (Age: 40.6±1.16 years). The mean SAT-PRO scores were 71.53±11.2. There was no difference in satisfaction scores between the groups formed according to education level or amputation level (p=0.101, p=0.256, respectively). In paired group comparisons for different statements evaluating the perceived awareness level, it was determined that prosthetic satisfaction was better in favour of the group with higher prosthetic awareness (p<0.05). Conclusion: The prosthetist being the main source of prosthetic information, the perceived importance of the prosthetist's professional skills and expert recommendation indicate the importance of the knowledge and experience of professionals in the prosthetic rehabilitation. Improving prosthetic awareness in both amputees and the society would be beneficial to improve key outcomes such as prosthetic satisfaction

Keywords

amputee , prosthetics , rehabilitation , satisfaction , awareness

Ethical Statement

Institution: University of Health Sciences Gülhane Scientific Research Ethics Committee Date: 28.06.2024 Approval no: 2024-368

Supporting Institution

-

Project Number

2024-368

Thanks

-

References

• Agamy, H. S., Soliman, N. M., & Fouadmaleka, F. (2018). Quality of life among adults with prosthesis limbs introduction. In Original Article Egyptian Journal of Health Care (Vol. 9, Issue 3).
• Anderson, C. B., Kittelson, A. J., Wurdeman, S. R., Miller, M. J., Stoneback, J. W., Christiansen, C. L., & Magnusson, D. M. (2023). Understanding decision-making in prosthetic rehabilitation by prosthetists and people with lower limb amputation: a qualitative study. Disability and Rehabilitation, 45(4), 723–732. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2022.2037745
• Baars, E. C., Schrier, E., DIjkstra, P. U., & Geertzen, J. H. B. (2018). Prosthesis satisfaction in lower limb amputees: A systematic review of associated factors and questionnaires. In Medicine (United States) (Vol. 97, Issue 39). Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000012296
• Balk, E. M., Gazula, A., Markozannes, G., Kimmel, H. J., Saldanha, I. J., Resnik, L. J., & Trikalinos, T. A. (2018). Lower limb prostheses: measurement instruments, comparison of component effects by subgroups, and long-term outcomes. In Comparative Effectiveness Review No. 213. ockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US). https://doi.org/10.23970/AHRQEPCCER213
• Berke, G. M., Fergason, J., Milani, J. R., Hattingh, J., McDowell, M., Nguyen, V., & Reiber, G. E. (2010). Comparison of satisfaction with current prosthetic care in veterans and servicemembers from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts with major traumatic limb loss. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 47(4), 361–371. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2009.12.0193
• Bilodeau, S., Hebert, R., & Desrosiers, J. (1999). Questionnaire sur la satisfaction des personnes amputées du membre inférieur face à leur prothèse: Développement et validation. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 66(1), 23–32.https://doi.org/10.1177/000841749906600103
• Brauckmann, V., Mönninghoff, S., Block, O. M., Braatz, F., Lehmann, W., Pardo, L. A., & Ernst, J. (2024). Report on prosthetic fitting, mobility, and overall satisfaction after major limb amputation at a german maximum care provider. Applied Sciences (Switzerland), 14(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/app14167274
• Burçak, B., Kesikburun, B., Köseoğlu, B. F., Öken, Ö., & Doğan, A. (2021). Quality of life, body image, and mobility in lower-limb amputees using high-tech prostheses: A pragmatic trial. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 64(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2020.03.016
• Çerezci Duygu, S., Anaforoğlu, B., & Erbahçeci, F. (2022). A Comparison of the Effects of Pin and Vacuum-Assisted Suspension Systems in Individuals With Transtibial Amputation. JPO Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 35. https://doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0000000000000432
• DadeMatthews, O. O., Roper, J. A., Vazquez, A., Shannon, D. M., & Sefton, J. E. M. (2024). Prosthetic device and service satisfaction, quality of life, and functional performance in lower limb prosthesis clients. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 48(4), 422–430. https://doi.org/10.1097/PXR.0000000000000285
• Dillingham, T. R., Pezzin, L. E., Mackenzie, E. J., & Burgess, A. R. (2001). Use and satisfaction with prosthetic devices among persons with trauma-related amputations a long-term outcome study. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 80(8), 563–571. http://journals.lww.com/ajpmr
• Eskridge, S. L., Dougherty, A. L., Watrous, J. R., McCabe, C. T., Cancio, J. M., Mazzone, B. N., & Galarneau, M. R. (2022). Prosthesis satisfaction and quality of life in US service members with combat-related major lower-limb amputation. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 46(1), 68–74. https://doi.org/10.1097/PXR.0000000000000054
• Esquenazi, A., & Meier, R. H. (1996). Rehabilitation in limb deficiency. 4. Limb amputation. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 77(3 SUPPL.). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(96)90239-7
• Gailey, R., Mcfarland, L. V., Cooper, R. A., Czerniecki, J., Gambel, J. M., Hubbard, S., Maynard, C., Smith, D. G., Raya, M., & Reiber, G. E. (2010). Unilateral lower-limb loss: Prosthetic device use and functional outcomes in servicemembers from Vietnam war and OIF/OEF conflicts. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 47(4), 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2009.04.0039
• Gailey, R. S., Roach, K. E., Brooks Applegate, E., Cho, B., Cunniffe, B., Licht, S., Maguire, M., & Nash, M. S. (2002). The Amputee Mobility Predictor: An Instrument to Assess Determinants of the Lower-Limb Amputee’s Ability to Ambulate. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.32309
• Gordon, R., Magee, C., Frazer, A., Evans, C., & Mccosker, K. (2010). An interim prosthesis program for lower limb amputees: Comparison of public and private models of service. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 34(2), 175–183. https://doi.org/10.3109/03093640903510980
• Kark, L., & Simmons, A. (2011). Patient satisfaction following lower-limb amputation: the role of gait deviation. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 35(2), 225–233. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364611406169/FORMAT/EPUB
• Kay, H. W., & Newman, J. D. (1975). Relative incidences of new amputations. Statistical comparisons of 6,000 new amputees. Orthotics and Prosthetics, 29(2), 3–16.
• Lee, P. V. S., Lythgo, N., Laing, S., Lavranos, J., & Thanh, N. H. (2014). Pressure casting technique for transtibial prosthetic socket fit in developing countries. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 51(1), 101–110. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2012.10.0191
• Legro, M. W., Reiber, G. D., Smith, D. G., Del Aguila, M., Larsen, J., & Boone, D. (1998). Prosthesis evaluation questionnaire for persons with lower limb amputations: Assessing prosthesis-related quality of life. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 79(8), 931–938. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(98)90090-9
• Mohd Hawari, N., Jawaid, M., Md Tahir, P., & Azmeer, R. A. (2017). Case study: survey of patient satisfaction with prosthesis quality and design among below-knee prosthetic leg socket users. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 12(8), 868–874. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2016.1269209
• Murray, C. D. (2013). “Don’t you talk to your prosthetist?” Communicational problems in the prescription of artificial limbs. Disability and Rehabilitation, 35(6), 513–521. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2012.704125 National Health Interview Survey, 1994. (1996). In ICPSR Data Holdings. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06724.v1
• Nielsen, C. C. (1991). A survey of amputees: functional level and life satisfaction, information needs, and the prosthetist’s role. Journal of Prosthetics and Ortohics, 3(3), 124–129.
• Ostler, C., Ellis-Hill, C., & Donovan-Hall, M. (2014). Expectations of rehabilitation following lower limb amputation: A qualitative study. Disability and Rehabilitation, 36(14), 1169–1175. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.833311
• Pezzin, L. E., Dillingham, T. R., MacKenzie, E. J., Ephraim, P., & Rossbach, P. (2004). Use and satisfaction with prosthetic limb devices and related services. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 85(5), 723–729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2003.06.002
• Poulin, S. (2024). Diabetes-Related Nontraumatic Lower-Extremity Amputations, Connecticut. Samitier, C. B., Guirao, L., Costea, M., Camos, J. M., & Pleguezuelos, E. (2016). The benefits of using a vacuum-assisted socket system to improve balance and gait in elderly transtibial amputees. Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 40(1), 83–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309364614546927
• Sansam, K., O’Connor, R. J., Neumann, V., & Bhakta, B. (2014). Clinicians’ perspectives on decision making in lower limb amputee rehabilitation. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 46(5), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1791
• Schaffalitzky, E., Gallagher, P., MacLachlan, M., & Ryall, N. (2011). Understanding the benefits of prosthetic prescription: Exploring the experiences of practitioners and lower limb prosthetic users. Disability and Rehabilitation, 33(15–16), 1314–1323. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2010.529234
• Seaman, J. P. (2010). Survey of individuals wearing lower limb prostheses. Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 22(4), 257–265. https://doi.org/10.1097/jpo.0b013e3181f99672
• Sindwani, P., Kothiyal, S., & Chauhan, P. (2024). Health-related quality of life and prosthetic satisfaction in below-knee amputees: a cross-sectional study. Medical Journal of Dr. D.Y. Patil Vidyapeeth, 17(3), 628–634. https://doi.org/10.4103/mjdrdypu.mjdrdypu_184_23
• Smith, D. G., Burgess, E. M., & Zettl, J. H. (1992). Special considerations: fitting and training the bilateral lower-limb amputee. In H. Bowker & J. Michael (Eds.), Atlas of Limb Prosthetics: Surgical, Prosthetic, and Rehabilitation Principles (2nd ed.). American Academy or Orthopedic Surgeons. https://www.oandplibrary.org/alp/chap24-01.asp
• Sugawara, A. T., Ramos, V. D., Alfieri, F. M., & Battistella, L. R. (2018). Abandonment of assistive products: assessing abandonment levels and factors that impact on it. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology, 13(7), 716–723. https://doi.org/10.1080/17483107.2018.1425748
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics (6th ed.). Pearson Education.
• Ülger, Ö., Yıldırım Şahan, T., & Çelik, S. E. (2018). A systematic literature review of physiotherapy and rehabilitation approaches to lower-limb amputation. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, 34(11), 821–834. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593985.2018.1425938
• Ziegler-Graham, K., Mackenzie, E. J., Ephraim, P. L., Travison, T. G., & Brookmeyer, R. (2008). Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the united states: 2005 to 2050. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Vol, 89, 422–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2007.11.005