Cargando…
Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: Enhancing the quality of life of people with a lower limb amputation is critical in prosthetic development and rehabilitation. Yet, no overview is available concerning the impact of passive, quasi-passive and active ankle–foot prostheses on quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To systematically r...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9840272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36639655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-023-01128-5 |
_version_ | 1784869607188725760 |
---|---|
author | Lathouwers, Elke Díaz, María Alejandra Maricot, Alexandre Tassignon, Bruno Cherelle, Claire Cherelle, Pierre Meeusen, Romain De Pauw, Kevin |
author_facet | Lathouwers, Elke Díaz, María Alejandra Maricot, Alexandre Tassignon, Bruno Cherelle, Claire Cherelle, Pierre Meeusen, Romain De Pauw, Kevin |
author_sort | Lathouwers, Elke |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Enhancing the quality of life of people with a lower limb amputation is critical in prosthetic development and rehabilitation. Yet, no overview is available concerning the impact of passive, quasi-passive and active ankle–foot prostheses on quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the therapeutic benefits of performing daily activities with passive, quasi-passive and active ankle–foot prostheses in people with a lower limb amputation. METHODS: We searched the Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus and Pedro databases, and backward citations until November 3, 2021. Only English-written randomised controlled trials, cross-sectional, cross-over and cohort studies were included when the population comprised individuals with a unilateral transfemoral or transtibial amputation, wearing passive, quasi-passive or active ankle–foot prostheses. The intervention and outcome measures had to include any aspect of quality of life assessed while performing daily activities. We synthesised the participants’ characteristics, type of prosthesis, intervention, outcome and main results, and conducted risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. This study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42021290189. RESULTS: We identified 4281 records and included 34 studies in total. Results indicate that quasi-passive and active prostheses are favoured over passive prostheses based on biomechanical, physiological, performance and subjective measures in the short-term. All studies had a moderate or high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Compared to passive ankle–foot prostheses, quasi-passive and active prostheses significantly enhance the quality of life. Future research should investigate the long-term therapeutic benefits of prosthetics devices. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9840272 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98402722023-01-15 Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review Lathouwers, Elke Díaz, María Alejandra Maricot, Alexandre Tassignon, Bruno Cherelle, Claire Cherelle, Pierre Meeusen, Romain De Pauw, Kevin J Neuroeng Rehabil Review BACKGROUND: Enhancing the quality of life of people with a lower limb amputation is critical in prosthetic development and rehabilitation. Yet, no overview is available concerning the impact of passive, quasi-passive and active ankle–foot prostheses on quality of life. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the therapeutic benefits of performing daily activities with passive, quasi-passive and active ankle–foot prostheses in people with a lower limb amputation. METHODS: We searched the Pubmed, Web of Science, Scopus and Pedro databases, and backward citations until November 3, 2021. Only English-written randomised controlled trials, cross-sectional, cross-over and cohort studies were included when the population comprised individuals with a unilateral transfemoral or transtibial amputation, wearing passive, quasi-passive or active ankle–foot prostheses. The intervention and outcome measures had to include any aspect of quality of life assessed while performing daily activities. We synthesised the participants’ characteristics, type of prosthesis, intervention, outcome and main results, and conducted risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. This study is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42021290189. RESULTS: We identified 4281 records and included 34 studies in total. Results indicate that quasi-passive and active prostheses are favoured over passive prostheses based on biomechanical, physiological, performance and subjective measures in the short-term. All studies had a moderate or high risk of bias. CONCLUSION: Compared to passive ankle–foot prostheses, quasi-passive and active prostheses significantly enhance the quality of life. Future research should investigate the long-term therapeutic benefits of prosthetics devices. BioMed Central 2023-01-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9840272/ /pubmed/36639655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-023-01128-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 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/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Review Lathouwers, Elke Díaz, María Alejandra Maricot, Alexandre Tassignon, Bruno Cherelle, Claire Cherelle, Pierre Meeusen, Romain De Pauw, Kevin Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review |
title | Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review |
title_full | Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review |
title_short | Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review |
title_sort | therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9840272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36639655 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12984-023-01128-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lathouwerselke therapeuticbenefitsoflowerlimbprosthesesasystematicreview AT diazmariaalejandra therapeuticbenefitsoflowerlimbprosthesesasystematicreview AT maricotalexandre therapeuticbenefitsoflowerlimbprosthesesasystematicreview AT tassignonbruno therapeuticbenefitsoflowerlimbprosthesesasystematicreview AT cherelleclaire therapeuticbenefitsoflowerlimbprosthesesasystematicreview AT cherellepierre therapeuticbenefitsoflowerlimbprosthesesasystematicreview AT meeusenromain therapeuticbenefitsoflowerlimbprosthesesasystematicreview AT depauwkevin therapeuticbenefitsoflowerlimbprosthesesasystematicreview |