Low back pain in persons with lower extremity amputation: a systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Lower extremity amputation (LEA) is associated with an elevated risk for development and progression of secondary health conditions. Low back pain (LBP) is one such condition adversely affecting function, independence, and quality of life. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to determine the strength of evidence relating the presence and severity of LBP secondary to LEA, thereby supporting the formulation of empirical evidence statements (EESs) to guide practice and future research. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Systematic review of the literature. METHODS: A systematic review of five databases was conducted followed by evaluation of evidence and synthesis of EESs. RESULTS: Seventeen manuscripts were included. From these, eight EESs were synthesized within the following categories: epidemiology, amputation level, function, disability, leg length, posture, spinal kinematics, and osseointegrated prostheses. Only the EES on epidemiology was supported by evidence at the moderate confidence level given support by eight moderate quality studies. The four EESs for amputation level, leg length, posture, and spinal kinematics were supported by evidence at the low confidence level given that each of these statements had some evidence not supporting the statement but ultimately more evidence (and of higher quality) currently supporting the statement. The remaining three EESs that addressed function, disability and osseointegrated prosthetic use were all supported by single studies or had comparable evidence that disagreed with study findings rendering insufficient evidence to support the respective EES. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the state of the current evidence, appropriate preventative and, particularly, treatment strategies to manage LBP in persons with LEA remain a knowledge gap and an area of future study.

Prosthetic interventions for people with transtibial amputation: Systematic review and meta-analysis of high-quality prospective literature and systematic reviews.

Considering transtibial amputation (TTA) rehabilitation costs and complexity, high-quality literature should inform clinical practice. Systematic reviews (SRs) suggest this is not the case. This article's purpose was to review the highest-quality evidence available to guide clinical practice for TTA regarding five prosthetic intervention areas. Six databases were searched for high-quality SRs and prospective clinical trials (randomized clinical trials [RCTs]). Reviewers screened, sorted, rated (i.e., methodologic quality, bias risk), and extracted article data. Meta-analyses were conducted when possible. Thirty-one references were included (25 RCTs and 6 SRs). Five topical areas emerged (alignment, feet and ankles, interface, postoperative care, pylons). Twenty-three evidence statements were supported by level 2 evidence and eight by level 1 evidence. All RCTs reported randomization and reasonable data presentation. Concealed allocation and blinding were not widely used. Mean attrition was 11%. SRs included no meta-analyses. Functional level was poorly reported. Grouping feet and ankle components by functional classification enabled meta-analyses, though variance was considerable given the small sample sizes. Prosthetic interventions are generally safe for TTAs. High-quality literature enabled formulation of evidence statements to support select clinical practice areas, though quantity was lacking. Thus, numerous topics related to TTA care lack rigorous evidence. Although blinding in prosthetic research requires increased funding and effort, it could greatly improve the methodologic quality of prosthetic research.