Cargando…

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions

BACKGROUND: Assistive products are items which allow older people and people with disabilities to be able to live a healthy, productive and dignified life. It has been estimated that approximately 1.5% of the world’s population need a prosthesis or orthosis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study wa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Healy, Aoife, Farmer, Sybil, Pandyan, Anand, Chockalingam, Nachiappan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5851539/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29538382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192094
_version_ 1783306402606874624
author Healy, Aoife
Farmer, Sybil
Pandyan, Anand
Chockalingam, Nachiappan
author_facet Healy, Aoife
Farmer, Sybil
Pandyan, Anand
Chockalingam, Nachiappan
author_sort Healy, Aoife
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Assistive products are items which allow older people and people with disabilities to be able to live a healthy, productive and dignified life. It has been estimated that approximately 1.5% of the world’s population need a prosthesis or orthosis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to systematically identify and review the evidence from randomized controlled trials assessing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions. METHODS: Literature searches, completed in September 2015, were carried out in fourteen databases between years 1995 and 2015. The search results were independently screened by two reviewers. For the purpose of this manuscript, only randomized controlled trials which examined interventions using orthotic or prosthetic devices were selected for data extraction and synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 342 randomised controlled trials were identified (319 English language and 23 non-English language). Only 4 of these randomised controlled trials examined prosthetic interventions and the rest examined orthotic interventions. These orthotic interventions were categorised based on the medical conditions/injuries of the participants. From these studies, this review focused on the medical condition/injuries with the highest number of randomised controlled trials (osteoarthritis, fracture, stroke, carpal tunnel syndrome, plantar fasciitis, anterior cruciate ligament, diabetic foot, rheumatoid and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, ankle sprain, cerebral palsy, lateral epicondylitis and low back pain). The included articles were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Details of the clinical population examined, the type of orthotic/prosthetic intervention, the comparator/s and the outcome measures were extracted. Effect sizes and odds ratios were calculated for all outcome measures, where possible. CONCLUSIONS: At present, for prosthetic and orthotic interventions, the scientific literature does not provide sufficient high quality research to allow strong conclusions on their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5851539
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58515392018-03-23 A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions Healy, Aoife Farmer, Sybil Pandyan, Anand Chockalingam, Nachiappan PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Assistive products are items which allow older people and people with disabilities to be able to live a healthy, productive and dignified life. It has been estimated that approximately 1.5% of the world’s population need a prosthesis or orthosis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to systematically identify and review the evidence from randomized controlled trials assessing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions. METHODS: Literature searches, completed in September 2015, were carried out in fourteen databases between years 1995 and 2015. The search results were independently screened by two reviewers. For the purpose of this manuscript, only randomized controlled trials which examined interventions using orthotic or prosthetic devices were selected for data extraction and synthesis. RESULTS: A total of 342 randomised controlled trials were identified (319 English language and 23 non-English language). Only 4 of these randomised controlled trials examined prosthetic interventions and the rest examined orthotic interventions. These orthotic interventions were categorised based on the medical conditions/injuries of the participants. From these studies, this review focused on the medical condition/injuries with the highest number of randomised controlled trials (osteoarthritis, fracture, stroke, carpal tunnel syndrome, plantar fasciitis, anterior cruciate ligament, diabetic foot, rheumatoid and juvenile idiopathic arthritis, ankle sprain, cerebral palsy, lateral epicondylitis and low back pain). The included articles were assessed for risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Details of the clinical population examined, the type of orthotic/prosthetic intervention, the comparator/s and the outcome measures were extracted. Effect sizes and odds ratios were calculated for all outcome measures, where possible. CONCLUSIONS: At present, for prosthetic and orthotic interventions, the scientific literature does not provide sufficient high quality research to allow strong conclusions on their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Public Library of Science 2018-03-14 /pmc/articles/PMC5851539/ /pubmed/29538382 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192094 Text en © 2018 Healy et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Healy, Aoife
Farmer, Sybil
Pandyan, Anand
Chockalingam, Nachiappan
A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions
title A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions
title_full A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions
title_fullStr A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions
title_short A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions
title_sort systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5851539/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29538382
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192094
work_keys_str_mv AT healyaoife asystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsassessingeffectivenessofprostheticandorthoticinterventions
AT farmersybil asystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsassessingeffectivenessofprostheticandorthoticinterventions
AT pandyananand asystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsassessingeffectivenessofprostheticandorthoticinterventions
AT chockalingamnachiappan asystematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsassessingeffectivenessofprostheticandorthoticinterventions
AT healyaoife systematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsassessingeffectivenessofprostheticandorthoticinterventions
AT farmersybil systematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsassessingeffectivenessofprostheticandorthoticinterventions
AT pandyananand systematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsassessingeffectivenessofprostheticandorthoticinterventions
AT chockalingamnachiappan systematicreviewofrandomisedcontrolledtrialsassessingeffectivenessofprostheticandorthoticinterventions