Correction: Development and initial validation of the Orthotic Patient-Reported Outcomes-Mobility (OPRO-M): An item bank for evaluating mobility of people who use lower-limb orthoses.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0293848.].

Utilization of orthoses and assistive devices among a national sample of lower limb orthosis users.

Introduction: Lower limb orthoses (LLOs) and assistive devices (ADs) can be used together or separately to improve mobility when performing daily activities. The goal of this study was to examine utilization of LLOs and ADs in a national sample of adult LLO users. Methods: A survey was designed to ask participants whether they typically use their LLOs and/or ADs to perform 20 daily activities. LLO users from orthotic clinics across the United States were invited to complete the survey. Descriptive statistics were used to examine utilization trends. Results: Survey responses from 1036 LLO users were analyzed. Community-based activities were performed with LLOs by at least 80% of participants. Activities that involved walking short distances in the home were more often performed without LLOs or ADs. Among participants with the four most prevalent health conditions, LLO use in the community was greatest among participants with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease. Conclusions: LLOs were frequently used for a wide range of community-based activities. Simultaneous use of ADs and LLOs may be most beneficial for LLO users when performing activities outside of the home. Clinicians can discuss LLO and AD use with patients to optimize their functional outcomes at home and in the community.

Development and initial validation of the Orthotic Patient-Reported Outcomes-Mobility (OPRO-M): An item bank for evaluating mobility of people who use lower-limb orthoses.

Lower limb orthoses (LLOs) are externally-applied leg braces that are designed to improve or maintain mobility in people with a variety of health conditions that affect lower limb function. Clinicians and researchers are therefore often motivated to measure LLO users' mobility to select or assess the effectiveness of these devices. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) can provide insights into important aspects of a LLO user's mobility for these purposes. However, few PROMs are available to measure mobility of LLO users. Those few that exist have issues that may limit their clinical or scientific utility. The objective of this study was to create a population-specific item bank for measuring mobility of LLO users. Previously-developed candidate items were administered in a cross-sectional study to a large national sample of LLO users. Responses from study participants (n = 1036) were calibrated to a graded response statistical model using Item Response Theory methods. A set of 39 items was found to be unidimensional, locally independent, and function without bias due to characteristics unrelated to mobility. The set of final calibrated items, termed the Orthotic Patient-Reported Outcomes-Mobility (OPRO-M) item bank, was evaluated for initial evidence of convergent, divergent, and known groups construct validity. OPRO-M was strongly correlated with existing PROMs designed to measure aspects of physical function. Conversely, OPRO-M was weakly correlated with PROMs that measured unrelated constructs, like sleep disturbance and depression. OPRO-M also showed an ability to differentiate groups with expected mobility differences. Two fixed-length short forms were created from the OPRO-M item bank. Items on the short forms were selected based on statistical and clinical criteria. Collectively, results from this study indicate that OPRO-M can effectively measure mobility of LLO users, and OPRO-M short forms can now be recommended for use in routine clinical practice and research studies.

Development of an item bank for measuring prosthetic mobility in people with lower limb amputation: The Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M).

BACKGROUND: Achieving mobility with a prosthesis is a common post-amputation rehabilitation goal and primary outcome in prosthetic research studies. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) available to measure prosthetic mobility have practical and psychometric limitations that inhibit their use in clinical care and research. OBJECTIVE: To develop a brief, clinically meaningful, and psychometrically robust PROM to measure prosthetic mobility. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted to administer previously developed candidate items to a national sample of lower limb prosthesis users. Items were calibrated to an item response theory model and two fixed-length short forms were created. Instruments were assessed for readability, effective range of measurement, agreement with the full item bank, ceiling and floor effects, convergent validity, and known groups validity. SETTING: Participants were recruited using flyers posted in hospitals and prosthetics clinics across the United States, magazine advertisements, notices posted to consumer websites, and direct mailings. PARTICIPANTS: Adult prosthesis users (N = 1091) with unilateral lower limb amputation due to traumatic or dysvascular causes. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Candidate items (N = 105) were administered along with the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Brief Profile, Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire - Mobility Subscale, and Activities-Specific Balance Confidence Scale, and questions created to characterize respondents. RESULTS: A bank of 44 calibrated self-report items, termed the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M), was produced. Clinical and statistical criteria were used to select items for 7- and 12-item short forms. PLUS-M instruments had an 8th grade reading level, measured with precision across a wide range of respondents, exhibited little-to-no ceiling or floor effects, correlated expectedly with scores from existing PROMs, and differentiated between groups of respondents expected to have different levels of mobility. CONCLUSION: The PLUS-M appears to be well suited to measuring prosthetic mobility in people with lower limb amputation. PLUS-M instruments are recommended for use in clinical and research settings.

Microprocessor feet improve prosthetic mobility and physical function relative to non-microprocessor feet.

Introduction: The clinical benefits associated with the microprocessor regulation of prosthetic ankle position and resistance have largely been reported through manufacturer conducted research in controlled laboratory environments. Measures with greater ecological validity are needed. This study aimed to understand if there are differences in physical function and mobility outcomes as patients transitioned from a non-Microprocessor to Microprocessor Feet. Method: A retrospective analysis of patient outcomes was performed. Patient-reported benefits associated with the adoption of such prosthetic foot-ankle mechanisms were collected from 23 individuals through the longitudinal use of a custom short form of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Physical Function and individual items from the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire. Results: The impact of Microprocessor Feet upon physical function and mobility were observed in a significant increase in physical function (mean increase in t-score of 5.4 ± 1.25; p = .0004) and significant improvements in several mobility items. Conclusions: Collectively, these measures support the beneficial impact of Microprocessor Feet on improving socket comfort, reducing back pain, improving sit to stand transfers and enhancing hill ascent and descent as well as stair negotiation.