How has body image been evaluated among people with lower limb loss? A scoping review.

PURPOSE: Lower limb loss can result in an altered body image, leading to changes in self-esteem, mental health and quality of life. This scoping review explored how body image has been evaluated among people with lower limb loss. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five databases (Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, CINHAL, and Nursing and Allied Health Database) were searched from inception until March 19, 2023. Inclusion criteria: 1) people with lower limb loss; 2) evaluated a body image outcome or theme; and 3) a qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods design. RESULTS: Twenty-four quantitative (n = 19 cross-sectional, n = 3 intervention cohort and n = 2 prospective cohort), 2 qualitative and 1 mixed methods design studies were included. The definition of body image varied across studies, with 59% of studies not reporting a conceptual or theoretical definition. People with lower limb loss perceived a more negative body image compared to control groups. In prospective cohort studies, changes in body image over time were inconclusive. CONCLUSION: People with lower limb loss report a negative body image when compared to other populations. Definitions and understanding of body image changed overtime and varied among studies which may impact introducing interventions to promote positive body image during rehabilitation and beyond in this population.

People with lower limb loss experience altered body image following limb amputation, at the initiation, during and after prosthetic rehabilitation, and re-integrating into the community.Clinicians are encouraged to use this study's proposed lower limb loss-specific definition of body image.The proposed definition incorporates common terminology used in past research in the field and amputee-specific situations when referring to altered body image among this patient population.To better support the psychological adjustment of people with lower limb loss in rehabilitation programs and beyond, clinicians and researchers should evaluate body image at multiple time points (e.g., admission and discharge to rehabilitation, follow-up) using an outcome measure that asks about both with and without a prosthesis on the residual limb.

The reliability of four standardized concern for falling scales among adults with a major lower extremity amputation.

INTRODUCTION: More than 52.4% of people with a lower extremity amputation (PLEA) will fall at least once each year. Previously established standardized scales that evaluate a concern for falling (CFF) were developed primarily among community-dwelling older adults. The reliability of commonly used scales to evaluate a CFF among PLEA is needed. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate test-retest relative and absolute reliability, and agreement of the Modified Survey of Activities and Fear of Falling in the Elderly (mSAFFE), Falls Efficacy Scale - International (FES-I), Consequences of Falling (COF) Scale, Perceived Control Over Falling (PCOF) Scale, and Perceived Ability to Manage Falls (PAMF) Scale among PLEA. DESIGN: Web-based cross-sectional repeated-measures study. SETTING: Rehabilitation hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with a transtibial or transfemoral level amputation, who had completed a prosthetic rehabilitation program, and at minimum of 1 year using a prosthesis for ambulation were recruited after regularly scheduled appointments (N = 22, mean age ± SD, 63.5 ± 12.9 years). INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Initial and re-test scores on the mSAFFE, FES-I, COF, PCOF, and PAMF. RESULTS: Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) demonstrated excellent relative reliability of the mSAFFE (ICC = 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-0.97), good relative reliability of the FES-I (ICC = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.70-0.94), and fair relative reliability of the COF (ICC = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.53-0.90) and PAMF (ICC = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.46-0.88) scales. The ICC value of the PCOF scale could not be validly calculated and was not further analyzed. Calculated standard error of measurement values for the mSAFFE, FES-I, COF, and PAMF scales were small in magnitude, and Bland-Altman graphs demonstrated good agreement of initial and re-test scores for all scales. CONCLUSION: This study provides initial evidence on the suitability and reliable use of the mSAFFE, FES-I, COF, and PAMF scales within this population. Further evaluation of the validity of these scales is needed.

A concern for falling impacts quality of life for people with a lower limb amputation.

The purpose of this web-based survey study was to comprehensively evaluate subdomains of concern for falling and its association with quality of life (QoL) among people with lower-limb amputations (PLLA). Forty-eight adults (mean 61.8 ± 11.6 years) with a major (i.e. transtibial or transfemoral) amputation participated. Individuals were currently using a prosthesis for ambulation, completed a prosthetic rehabilitation program, had functional use of English and had access to an internet-connected device (e.g. laptop). Five standardized scales assessed a concern for falling: Modified Survey of Activities and Fear of Falling in the Elderly (mSAFFE), Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale, Prosthetic Limb Users Survey - Mobility (PLUS-M), Consequences of Falling Scale and Perceived Ability to Manage Falls Scale. QoL was evaluated using the WHO QoL-100 questionnaire. Spearman correlation analysis evaluated the relationship between the five concerns for falling scales. Five independent linear regression modeling evaluated the association of each concern for falling measure on QoL. Strong statistically significant correlations were found between mSAFFE and PLUS-M (r s = -0.87; P < 0.05). Three scales were significantly associated with QoL: mSAFFE [-1.16 (95% CI, -2.04 to -0.29)], ABC [0.36 (95% CI, 0.11-0.61)] and PLUS-M [0.50 (95% CI, 0.05-0.95)]. This is the first study to evaluate multiple concerns for falling subdomains among PLLA. Concern for falling should be addressed in prosthetic rehabilitation to improve community re-integration and QoL.