Kronik Engelli Bireylerde Ortez Ve Yardımcı Cihaz Memnuniyetinin Araştırılması

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı ortez/yardımcı cihaz tavsiye edilen kronik engelli bireylerin ortez kullanım memnuniyetlerinin araştırılması. Bununla birlikte tanı grupları ve serebral palsili bireylerin motor fonksiyon seviyeleri ile ortez kullanım memnuniyeti arasında ilişki olup olmadığının araştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntem: Çalışmaya 105 kronik engelli birey (64 serebral palsili, 13 spina bifida, 14 musküler distrofi ve 14 farklı nörolojik tanılı birey) ve aileleri dahil edildi. Yardımcı cihaz/ortez kullanımı, günlük kullanma süreleri ve eğer ortezlerini kullanmıyorlarsa nedenleri sorgulandı. Bireylerin ortez kullanım memnuniyetleri araştırmacılar tarafından literatüre dayanarak oluşturulmuş Ortez Kullanım Memnuniyet Anketi ile değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Serebral palsili bireylerin motor fonksiyon düzeyleri ile ortez kullanım memnuniyeti arasında ilişki olmadığı bulundu (p=0.779). Ortez Kullanım Memnuniyet Anketi toplam skoru ve günlük ortez kullanma süreleri arasında pozitif yönlü zayıf bir ilişki saptandı (r=0.242, p=0.015). Ortez Kullanım Memnuniyet Anketi toplam skoru ve ne kadar zamandır ortez kullanıldığına ait veriler arasında bir ilişki bulunmadı (p=0.811). Engelli bireylerin tanılarının (p=0.23) ve cihaz/ortez tipinin ortez kullanma memnuniyeti skorları ile ilişkili olmadığı saptandı (p=0.97). Sonuç: Sonuç olarak, kronik engelli bireylerde ortez/yardımcı cihaz günlük kullanım süresi arttıkça kullanım memnuniyetinin arttığı ve cihaz/ortez tipinin ortez kullanma memnuniyeti ile ilşkili olmadığı gözlemlendi. Ayrıca serebral palsili, spina bifida, musküler distrofi ve diğer tanı gruplarının ortez memnuniyetlerinin benzer olduğu görüldü.

Keywords

• Hasta memnuniyeti,Ortotik cihazlar,AFO,Tekerlekli sandalye

An Investigation Of Orthosis And Assistive Device Satisfaction In Individuals with Chronic Disabilities

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the orthosis satisfaction of chronically disabled individuals who are recommended to use the orthosis/assistive device. In addition, it is aimed to investigate whether there is a relationship between the motor function levels of the diagnostic groups and individuals with cerebral palsy and the orthotic use satisfaction. Materials and Methods:105 chronically disabled individuals (64 cerebral palsy, 13 spina-bfida, 14 muscular dystrophy, and 14 different neurologic diagnostic individuals) and their families were included in the study. The use of assistive device/orthosis, duration of daily use, if they aren’t using orthoses, reasons were questioned. Orthotics usage satisfaction was assessed by Orthotics Use Satisfaction Questionnaire, which was based on literature by the researchers. Results: There was no correlation between motor function levels of individuals with cerebral palsy and orthotic use satisfaction (p=0.779). There was a weak positive correlation between the total score of Orthotics Use Satisfaction Questionnaire and daily use of orthosis (r=0.242, p=0.015). There was no correlation between the total score of Orthotics Use Satisfaction Questionnaire and the duration of the use of orthotics (p=0.811). It was determined that the diagnoses of the disabled individuals (p=0.23) and the device/orthotics type were not related to the orthosis use satisfaction scores (p=0.97). Conclusion: As a result, it was observed that the use of orthosis/assistive device increased in daily life and increased use satisfaction and device/orthotics type was not associated with orthosis use satisfaction. In addition, cerebral palsy, spina bifida, muscular dystrophy, and other diagnostic groups were found to be similar in orthosis satisfaction.

Keywords

• Patient satisfaction,Orthotic devices,AFO,Wheelchair

References

1. 1. Bettoni E, G Ferriero, H Bakhsh, et al. A systematic review of questionnaires to assess patient satisfaction with limb orthoses, Prosthetics and Orthotics International, 2016, 40(2), 158-69.
2. 2. Karaduman A, Yilmaz ÖT., Ortopedik Rehabilitasyon Pediatrik Rehabilitasyon; Pelikan Yayınevi: Ankara, Turkiye, 2016; pp 1079-138.
3. 3. Demers L, M Monette, Y Lapierre, D Arnold, C Wolfson. Reliability, validity, and applicability of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) for adults with multiple sclerosis. Disability and Rehabilitation, 2002, 24(1-3), 21-30.
4. 4. Chen C-L, Y-L Teng, S-Z Lou, et al. User satisfaction with orthotic devices and service in Taiwan, PloS One, 2014, 9(10), e110661.
5. 5. Basaran S, IC Benlidayi, PH Yigitoglu, N Gökcen, R Guzel. Actual use and satisfaction of lower extremity orthoses in neurological disorders, Turkish Journal Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2016, 62(2),143-7.
6. 6. Rackauskaite, Gija, et al. Impact of child and family characteristics on cerebral palsy treatment, Develoğmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 2015, 57(10), 948-954.
7. 7. Erel S, IE Simsek, N Bek, et al. The effect of plastic foot-ankle orthosis appearance in childhood on satisfaction and orthosis acceptance, Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2007, 18(3), 195-200.
8. 8. Lee S-H. Users’ satisfaction with assistive devices in South Korea, Journal of Physical Therapy Science, 2014,26(4), 509-12.

9. 9. Dilek B, G Gozde, Y Yakut. An investigation of the duration of ankle foot orthosis’daily usage in children withcerebral palsy: a pilot study, Journal of Exercise Therapy and Rehabilitation, 2015, 2(2), 47-52.
10. 10. Peaco A, E Halsne, BJ Hafner. Assessing satisfaction with orthotic devices and services: a systematic literature review, Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics, 2011, 23(2), 95-105.
11. 11. Holtkamp F, E Wouters, J Van Hoof, Y Van Zaalen, M Verkerk. Use of and satisfaction with ankle foot orthoses, Clinical Research on Foot and Ankle, 2015, 3(1), 1000167.
12. 12. Hovorka C, M Geil, M Lusardi. Orthotics and Prosthetics in Rehabilitation. 2nd edn. Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann, 2007, pp 135-6.
13. 13. Amosun S, A Ndosi, H Buchanan. Locally manufactured wheelchairs in Tanzania–are users satisfied, African Health Sciences, 2016, 16(4), 1174-81.
14. 14. Magnusson L, G Ahlström. Patients’ Satisfaction with Lower-limb Prosthetic and Orthotic Devices and Service delivery in Sierra Leone and Malawi, BMC Health Services Research, 2017, 17(1), 102.
15. 15. Bus SA, R Waaijman, F Nollet. New monitoring technology to objectively assess adherence to prescribed footwear and assistive devices during ambulatory activity, Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2012, 93(11), 2075-9.
16. 16. Maas JC, AJ Dallmeijer, BY Oudshoorn. Measuring wearing time of knee-ankle-foot orthoses in children with cerebral palsy: comparison of parent-report and objective measurement, Disability Rehabilitation, 2018, 40(4), 398-403.
17. 17. Copley J, J Ziviani. Barriers to the use of assistive technology for children with multiple disabilities, Occupationl Therapy International, 2004, 11(4), 229-43.