Cargando…
Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation
PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective analysis was to investigate and evaluate differences in functional outcome and satisfaction of patients treated with a TOPS and patients using socket prosthesis after transfemoral amputation. METHODS: This retrospective comprehensive analysis included patients...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9712408/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35717545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02018-6 |
_version_ | 1784841780224589824 |
---|---|
author | Örgel, Marcus Schwarze, Frederik Graulich, Tilman Krettek, Christian Weidemann, Friederike Aschoff, Horst-Heinrich Winkelmann, Marcel Ranker, Alexander |
author_facet | Örgel, Marcus Schwarze, Frederik Graulich, Tilman Krettek, Christian Weidemann, Friederike Aschoff, Horst-Heinrich Winkelmann, Marcel Ranker, Alexander |
author_sort | Örgel, Marcus |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective analysis was to investigate and evaluate differences in functional outcome and satisfaction of patients treated with a TOPS and patients using socket prosthesis after transfemoral amputation. METHODS: This retrospective comprehensive analysis included patients from a single hospital, and was conducted between February 2017 and December 2018. Overall n = 139 patients with prosthesis were included and divided into two comparable groups (socket- and TOPS group). Incomplete data sets were excluded. This led to n = 36 participants for the socket- and n = 33 for the TOPS group. Functional outcome and satisfaction were evaluated by Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). The used PROMs were: Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (Q-TFA), EQ5D-5L, Satisfaction with Prosthesis Questionnaire (SAT-PRO), Prosthesis Mobility Questionnaire (PMQ 2.0) and Functional Independence Measure (FIM). RESULTS: Significant results in favor of TOPS patients were identified for the EQ-5D 5L (p = 0.004), Q-TFA (p = 0.000), SAT-PRO (p = 0.000) and PMQ 2.0 (p = 0.000). For FIM, no statistical significance was found (p = 0.318). CONCLUSION: In this study, transfemoral amputees treated with an osseointegrated prosthetic attachment (TOPS) showed significantly higher scores for mobility and satisfaction. This demonstrates the high potential of TOPS in the prosthetic treatment of patients with transfemoral amputation with regard to their functional abilities in daily life. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00068-022-02018-6. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9712408 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97124082022-12-02 Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation Örgel, Marcus Schwarze, Frederik Graulich, Tilman Krettek, Christian Weidemann, Friederike Aschoff, Horst-Heinrich Winkelmann, Marcel Ranker, Alexander Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this retrospective analysis was to investigate and evaluate differences in functional outcome and satisfaction of patients treated with a TOPS and patients using socket prosthesis after transfemoral amputation. METHODS: This retrospective comprehensive analysis included patients from a single hospital, and was conducted between February 2017 and December 2018. Overall n = 139 patients with prosthesis were included and divided into two comparable groups (socket- and TOPS group). Incomplete data sets were excluded. This led to n = 36 participants for the socket- and n = 33 for the TOPS group. Functional outcome and satisfaction were evaluated by Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). The used PROMs were: Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (Q-TFA), EQ5D-5L, Satisfaction with Prosthesis Questionnaire (SAT-PRO), Prosthesis Mobility Questionnaire (PMQ 2.0) and Functional Independence Measure (FIM). RESULTS: Significant results in favor of TOPS patients were identified for the EQ-5D 5L (p = 0.004), Q-TFA (p = 0.000), SAT-PRO (p = 0.000) and PMQ 2.0 (p = 0.000). For FIM, no statistical significance was found (p = 0.318). CONCLUSION: In this study, transfemoral amputees treated with an osseointegrated prosthetic attachment (TOPS) showed significantly higher scores for mobility and satisfaction. This demonstrates the high potential of TOPS in the prosthetic treatment of patients with transfemoral amputation with regard to their functional abilities in daily life. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00068-022-02018-6. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2022-06-18 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC9712408/ /pubmed/35717545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02018-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Article Örgel, Marcus Schwarze, Frederik Graulich, Tilman Krettek, Christian Weidemann, Friederike Aschoff, Horst-Heinrich Winkelmann, Marcel Ranker, Alexander Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation |
title | Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation |
title_full | Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation |
title_fullStr | Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation |
title_short | Comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (TOPS) after transfemoral amputation |
title_sort | comparison of functional outcome and patient satisfaction between patients with socket prosthesis and patients treated with transcutaneous osseointegrated prosthetic systems (tops) after transfemoral amputation |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9712408/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35717545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00068-022-02018-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT orgelmarcus comparisonoffunctionaloutcomeandpatientsatisfactionbetweenpatientswithsocketprosthesisandpatientstreatedwithtranscutaneousosseointegratedprostheticsystemstopsaftertransfemoralamputation AT schwarzefrederik comparisonoffunctionaloutcomeandpatientsatisfactionbetweenpatientswithsocketprosthesisandpatientstreatedwithtranscutaneousosseointegratedprostheticsystemstopsaftertransfemoralamputation AT graulichtilman comparisonoffunctionaloutcomeandpatientsatisfactionbetweenpatientswithsocketprosthesisandpatientstreatedwithtranscutaneousosseointegratedprostheticsystemstopsaftertransfemoralamputation AT krettekchristian comparisonoffunctionaloutcomeandpatientsatisfactionbetweenpatientswithsocketprosthesisandpatientstreatedwithtranscutaneousosseointegratedprostheticsystemstopsaftertransfemoralamputation AT weidemannfriederike comparisonoffunctionaloutcomeandpatientsatisfactionbetweenpatientswithsocketprosthesisandpatientstreatedwithtranscutaneousosseointegratedprostheticsystemstopsaftertransfemoralamputation AT aschoffhorstheinrich comparisonoffunctionaloutcomeandpatientsatisfactionbetweenpatientswithsocketprosthesisandpatientstreatedwithtranscutaneousosseointegratedprostheticsystemstopsaftertransfemoralamputation AT winkelmannmarcel comparisonoffunctionaloutcomeandpatientsatisfactionbetweenpatientswithsocketprosthesisandpatientstreatedwithtranscutaneousosseointegratedprostheticsystemstopsaftertransfemoralamputation AT rankeralexander comparisonoffunctionaloutcomeandpatientsatisfactionbetweenpatientswithsocketprosthesisandpatientstreatedwithtranscutaneousosseointegratedprostheticsystemstopsaftertransfemoralamputation |