Prosthetic Foot Selection for Individuals with Lower-Limb Amputation: A Clinical Practice Guideline.

INTRODUCTION: This guideline was developed to present current evidence and to provide associated clinical recommendations on prosthetic foot selection for individuals with lower-limb amputation. MATERIALS: NA. METHODS: The guideline is based upon the best available evidence as it relates prosthetic foot selection during the provision of definitive lower-limb prostheses. Where possible, recommendations are drawn from Cochrane Review, meta-analysis, systematic and narrative literature reviews, and published evidence-based guidelines. Where this standard is unavailable, alternate academic literature has been used to support individual recommendations. RESULTS: Recommendation 1: For patients ambulating at a single speed who require greater stability during weight acceptance because of weak knee extensors or poor balance, a single-axis foot should be considered. Recommendation 2: Patients at elevated risks for overuse injury (i.e., osteoarthritis) to the sound-side lower limb and lower back are indicated for an energy-storage-and-return (ESAR) foot to reduce the magnitude of the cyclical vertical impacts experienced during weight acceptance. Recommendation 3: Neither patient age nor amputation etiology should be viewed as primary considerations in prosthetic foot type. Recommendation 4: Patients capable of variable speed and/or community ambulation are indicated for ESAR feet. CONCLUSIONS: These clinical practice guidelines summarize the available evidence related to prosthetic foot selection for individuals with lower limb amputation. The noted clinical practice guidelines are meant to serve only as "guides." They may not apply to all patients and clinical situations.

FUNCTIONAL DIFFERENCES OF BILATERAL TRANSFEMORAL AMPUTEES USING FULL-LENGTH AND STUBBY-LENGTH PROSTHESES.

Many unilateral amputations are followed by a contralateral amputation within three years, sometimes presenting as bilateral transfemoral amputations. Bilateral transfemoral amputees that successfully use prostheses are an understudied patient population. This study establishes reference values for this population in users of short non-articulating (stubby) or full-length articulating prostheses. Anthropometric and demographic information was collected from participants. Additionally, participants completed a self-reported Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire-Mobility Subscale 12/5 (PEQ-MS) and performed multiple physical mobility tests, including walking tests and the multi-directional Four Square Step Test (FSST). Full-length users rated their abilities to complete the PEQ-MS tasks as less difficult than stubby users in eight of the 12 items. Gait analysis revealed a greater amount of time is spent in stance phase with a greater portion in double limb support for both user groups, and a greater percentage in stance phase for the subject-reported dominant limb. Stubby users' gait velocity had a significant reduction from that of their full-length peers; however, cadence was similar between groups. Both user groups completed the FSST at comparable times. These outcomes may be of benefit for identifying tasks bilateral transfemoral prosthetic users may find to be most difficult as well as for identifying normal ambulation patterns within this population. Future studies with a greater number of subjects would enable these results to be further generalized.

Removable Rigid Dressings for Postoperative Management of Transtibial Amputations: A Review of Published Evidence.

Forty years of clinical experience and peer-reviewed research studies support the use of nonweight-bearing removable rigid dressings (RRDs) as an effective means of postoperative management of transtibial amputations. We reviewed the published medical evidence regarding the use of RRDs as a postoperative management strategy, culminating in an evidence-based practice recommendation. Published peer-reviewed literature on the topic was searched and classified by level of evidence based on the research design using the scale recommended by the PM&R (level I through V). The search uncovered a total of 15 articles, including 5 level I randomized controlled trials, 6 level III retrospective matched controlled trials, and 4 level V case reports. A number of benefits associated with the application of RRDs compared with soft dressings were reported across these 15 studies. These included faster healing times, reduced limb edema, preparatory contouring of the residual limb in anticipation of prosthetic use, the prevention of knee flexion contractures, and reduced external trauma to the limb. Also described were an increased probability of successful prosthetic use and pain reduction. The RRDs studied permitted regular inspection of surgical wounds with greater ease and consistency of application than traditional soft dressing approaches. Rigid dressings provide all the same benefits of RRDs except ease of wound inspection, therefore rendering them impractical for the 82% of patients receiving an amputation for ischemic disease that are at high risk of developing wound dehiscence. Weight-bearing immediate postoperative prostheses are almost exclusively reserved for use on trauma patients who usually do not show evidence of vascular or neurologic impairment. The inherent risks of falls and inconsistent pressure on the surgical wound have further restricted their use in practice to a limited patient type. The benefits of RRDs compared with soft dressings are universally recognized in the published peer-reviewed medical evidence to be superior to soft dressings. Based on the best-available current published evidence, nonweight-bearing removable rigid dressings should be considered the first treatment choice for the postoperative care of transtibial amputees to optimize outcomes with regard to reductions in injury due to falls, knee flexion contractures, edema, healing time, time to prosthetic fitting, and pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Benefits for Adults with Transfemoral Amputations and Peripheral Artery Disease Using Microprocessor Compared with Nonmicroprocessor Prosthetic Knees.

OBJECTIVE: Approximately 50% of people with leg amputation fall annually. Evidence suggests that microprocessor knees (MK) may decrease falls and improve prosthetic function in people with traumatic amputations. This study explored whether adults with transfemoral amputations and peripheral artery disease would have reduced falls and improved balance confidence, balance, and walking ability when using prostheses with MK compared with non-MK. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. RESULTS: Eight subjects averaged 60.8 ± 11.3 yrs or age and 9.5 ± 16.1 yrs since first amputation. Four were K1-K2-level and four were K3-level functional walkers; only Houghton prosthetic use score was different between K1-K2 and K3 walkers (P = 0.03). After 48.3 ± 38.1 wks of acclimation using MK, subjects demonstrated improvements in fear of falling, balance confidence, Timed Up-and-Go time, and rate of falls (P < 0.05). The improvements in fear of falling, balance confidence, and rate of falls had large effect sizes (d > 0.80). Average decreased Timed Up-and-Go time (12.3 secs) had a medium effect size (d = 0.34). Decreases in the number of falls correlated with faster Timed Up-and-Go speed (ρ = -0.76) and greater balance confidence (ρ = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: People with peripheral artery disease and transfemoral amputations had fewer falls and improved balance confidence and walking performance when using prostheses with MK.

Benefits of early prosthetic management of transtibial amputees: a prospective clinical study of a prefabricated prosthesis.

To evaluate the use of an immediate postoperative prosthesis (IPOP) for transtibial amputees, we compared patient outcomes from a prospective clinical study of 19 patients managed with an IPOP with those of a retrospective review of a matched historic control group of 23 patients managed with standard soft dressings. Data were analyzed with the Student's t-test, and significance was set at P = 0.05. The IPOP patients had no surgical revisions, whereas the patients with standard soft dressings had 11. This was a significant difference. IPOP patients also had significantly fewer postoperative complications and shorter times to custom prosthesis than did controls.