针与真空辅助悬架系统在胫骨截肢患者中的效果比较

IF 0.4 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics Pub Date : 2022-04-28 DOI:10.1097/JPO.0000000000000432
Senay Cerezci Duygu, Bahar Anaforoğlu, F. Erbahçeci
{"title":"针与真空辅助悬架系统在胫骨截肢患者中的效果比较","authors":"Senay Cerezci Duygu, Bahar Anaforoğlu, F. Erbahçeci","doi":"10.1097/JPO.0000000000000432","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Introduction Suspension systems are essential components for a lower-limb prosthesis, as they provide sufficient prosthetic fit. Although various adverse and positive effects have been reported for suspension systems, it is important to determine the effects on the prosthesis users in detail. Objective The aim of this study was to compare the pin suspension system (PSS) with the vacuum-assisted suspension system (VASS) in terms of parameters including walking capacity, functional mobility, weight bearing on the operated side, prosthesis satisfaction, and body image perception. Study Design This is an original research report. Methods Nine individuals with transtibial amputation were evaluated. Both suspension systems were applied consecutively. Initially, participants used the PSS for 3 months after fabrication and adjustment of the prosthesis and a prosthetic training period. They then used the VASS for 3 months after a similar training period. After both prosthetic systems had been adjusted, L.A.S.A.R. Posture was used to determine weight bearing on the prosthetic side. The 6-minute walk test was applied for walking capacity, the timed up-and-go test was used to determine functional mobility, the Prosthetic Satisfaction Index was used for prosthetic satisfaction, and the Amputee Body Image Scale was used for body image perception. Results Significant differences were observed between PSS and VASS in terms of prosthetic side weight-bearing ratios, walking capacity, functional mobility, and prosthetic satisfaction (P < 0.05), all in favor of VASS. No significant difference was determined in terms of body image scores (P > 0.05). Conclusion In terms of function and prosthetic satisfaction in individuals with transtibial amputation, VASS was determined to be superior. The available evidence suggests that if there is no contraindication for the use of VASS, it may contribute to the individual with amputation functionally and increase the satisfaction with the prosthesis. Clinical Relevance Vacuum systems can make a positive contribution to reaching the goals for prosthesis users who are targeted to have high physical activity levels. This positive contribution includes increased weight transfer to the prosthetic side, an increase in mobility determinants, and increased prosthesis satisfaction, which has many dimensions.","PeriodicalId":53702,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics","volume":"35 1","pages":"25 - 31"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Comparison of the Effects of Pin and Vacuum-Assisted Suspension Systems in Individuals With Transtibial Amputation\",\"authors\":\"Senay Cerezci Duygu, Bahar Anaforoğlu, F. Erbahçeci\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JPO.0000000000000432\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Introduction Suspension systems are essential components for a lower-limb prosthesis, as they provide sufficient prosthetic fit. Although various adverse and positive effects have been reported for suspension systems, it is important to determine the effects on the prosthesis users in detail. Objective The aim of this study was to compare the pin suspension system (PSS) with the vacuum-assisted suspension system (VASS) in terms of parameters including walking capacity, functional mobility, weight bearing on the operated side, prosthesis satisfaction, and body image perception. Study Design This is an original research report. Methods Nine individuals with transtibial amputation were evaluated. Both suspension systems were applied consecutively. Initially, participants used the PSS for 3 months after fabrication and adjustment of the prosthesis and a prosthetic training period. They then used the VASS for 3 months after a similar training period. After both prosthetic systems had been adjusted, L.A.S.A.R. Posture was used to determine weight bearing on the prosthetic side. The 6-minute walk test was applied for walking capacity, the timed up-and-go test was used to determine functional mobility, the Prosthetic Satisfaction Index was used for prosthetic satisfaction, and the Amputee Body Image Scale was used for body image perception. Results Significant differences were observed between PSS and VASS in terms of prosthetic side weight-bearing ratios, walking capacity, functional mobility, and prosthetic satisfaction (P < 0.05), all in favor of VASS. No significant difference was determined in terms of body image scores (P > 0.05). Conclusion In terms of function and prosthetic satisfaction in individuals with transtibial amputation, VASS was determined to be superior. The available evidence suggests that if there is no contraindication for the use of VASS, it may contribute to the individual with amputation functionally and increase the satisfaction with the prosthesis. Clinical Relevance Vacuum systems can make a positive contribution to reaching the goals for prosthesis users who are targeted to have high physical activity levels. This positive contribution includes increased weight transfer to the prosthetic side, an increase in mobility determinants, and increased prosthesis satisfaction, which has many dimensions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53702,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"25 - 31\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0000000000000432\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPO.0000000000000432","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

悬吊系统是下肢假肢的重要组成部分,因为它们提供了足够的假肢配合。虽然已经报道了悬浮系统的各种不利和积极的影响,但详细确定对假体使用者的影响是很重要的。目的比较针悬吊系统(PSS)与真空辅助悬吊系统(VASS)在行走能力、功能活动能力、手术侧负重、假体满意度和身体形象感知等方面的差异。研究设计这是一份原始研究报告。方法对9例经胫骨截肢患者进行临床评价。两种悬架系统连续应用。最初,参与者在假体的制造和调整以及假体训练期后使用PSS 3个月。在类似的训练期后,他们使用VASS长达3个月。两个假体系统调整后,使用L.A.S.A.R.姿势来确定假体一侧的承重。行走能力采用6分钟步行测试,功能活动能力采用定时起跑测试,义肢满意度指数采用义肢满意度指数,身体形象感知采用截肢者身体形象量表。结果PSS与VASS在义肢侧负重比、行走能力、功能活动能力、义肢满意度等方面均有显著性差异(P < 0.05),均有利于VASS。两组身体形象评分差异无统计学意义(P < 0.05)。结论在经胫骨截肢患者的功能和义肢满意度方面,VASS具有优势。现有证据表明,如果使用VASS无禁忌症,它可能有助于截肢患者的功能,并提高对假体的满意度。临床相关性真空系统可以为达到具有高体力活动水平的假体使用者的目标做出积极贡献。这种积极的贡献包括增加重量转移到假体一侧,增加活动决定因素,增加假体满意度,这有很多方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Comparison of the Effects of Pin and Vacuum-Assisted Suspension Systems in Individuals With Transtibial Amputation
ABSTRACT Introduction Suspension systems are essential components for a lower-limb prosthesis, as they provide sufficient prosthetic fit. Although various adverse and positive effects have been reported for suspension systems, it is important to determine the effects on the prosthesis users in detail. Objective The aim of this study was to compare the pin suspension system (PSS) with the vacuum-assisted suspension system (VASS) in terms of parameters including walking capacity, functional mobility, weight bearing on the operated side, prosthesis satisfaction, and body image perception. Study Design This is an original research report. Methods Nine individuals with transtibial amputation were evaluated. Both suspension systems were applied consecutively. Initially, participants used the PSS for 3 months after fabrication and adjustment of the prosthesis and a prosthetic training period. They then used the VASS for 3 months after a similar training period. After both prosthetic systems had been adjusted, L.A.S.A.R. Posture was used to determine weight bearing on the prosthetic side. The 6-minute walk test was applied for walking capacity, the timed up-and-go test was used to determine functional mobility, the Prosthetic Satisfaction Index was used for prosthetic satisfaction, and the Amputee Body Image Scale was used for body image perception. Results Significant differences were observed between PSS and VASS in terms of prosthetic side weight-bearing ratios, walking capacity, functional mobility, and prosthetic satisfaction (P < 0.05), all in favor of VASS. No significant difference was determined in terms of body image scores (P > 0.05). Conclusion In terms of function and prosthetic satisfaction in individuals with transtibial amputation, VASS was determined to be superior. The available evidence suggests that if there is no contraindication for the use of VASS, it may contribute to the individual with amputation functionally and increase the satisfaction with the prosthesis. Clinical Relevance Vacuum systems can make a positive contribution to reaching the goals for prosthesis users who are targeted to have high physical activity levels. This positive contribution includes increased weight transfer to the prosthetic side, an increase in mobility determinants, and increased prosthesis satisfaction, which has many dimensions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics
Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
16.70%
发文量
59
期刊介绍: Published quarterly by the AAOP, JPO: Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics provides information on new devices, fitting and fabrication techniques, and patient management experiences. The focus is on prosthetics and orthotics, with timely reports from related fields such as orthopaedic research, occupational therapy, physical therapy, orthopaedic surgery, amputation surgery, physical medicine, biomedical engineering, psychology, ethics, and gait analysis. Each issue contains research-based articles reviewed and approved by a highly qualified editorial board and an Academy self-study quiz offering two PCE''s.
期刊最新文献
Comparison of Physical Therapy and Orthosis on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Medial Knee Osteoarthritis Blood Pressure Regulation in Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation: Effects of Wearing a Prosthesis Motion Analysis of a Frontal Plane Adaptable Prosthetic Foot Immediate Effect of Soft Lumbosacral Orthosis on Trunk Stability and Upper-Limb Functionality in Children with Cerebral Palsy Importance of Health Policy and Systems Research for Strengthening Rehabilitation in Health Systems: A Call to Action to Accelerate Progress.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1