A scoping literature review of the provision of orthoses and prostheses in resource-limited environments 2000-2010. Part two: research and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Despite the activities of many orthotic and prosthetic provision organizations in resource-limited environments, there is still a great need and there are several areas for improvement, as identified in Part One of this series. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to examine outcomes and conclusions of research studies to produce an evidence base for determining factors that may lead to successful provision of orthoses and prostheses in resource-limited environments. STUDY DESIGN: Literature review. METHODS: We conducted a scoping literature review of all information related to orthotic and prosthetic provision in resource-limited environments published from 2000 to 2010. We extracted measured outcomes reported in all types of articles and analyzed conclusions from research studies. RESULTS: Reported outcomes included durability, cost, satisfaction, use/nonuse of device, amount of utilization, walking speed, discomfort, pain, fit, misalignment, capacity for service provision, number of devices produced or delivered, and number of graduates from training programs. CONCLUSIONS: There are many gaps in the evidence base, notably in measuring inclusion, participation, and quality of life for orthosis and prosthesis users in resource-limited environments. There is a paucity of reported outcomes for orthotics. Valid, reliable, and standard methods of data collection and reporting are needed to advance the field and enhance the evidence base.

A scoping literature review of the provision of orthoses and prostheses in resource-limited environments 2000-2010. Part one: considerations for success.

STUDY DESIGN: Literature Review BACKGROUND: We estimate that over 29 million people worldwide in resource-limited environments (RLEs) are in need of orthotic and prosthetic (O&P) devices and services. OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to ascertain the current state of O&P provision in RLEs and identify factors that may lead to more successful O&P provision. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive scoping literature review of all information related to O&P provision in RLEs published from 2000 to 2010. We targeted Vietnam, Cambodia, Tanzania, Malawi, Colombia, and the Navajo Nation, but also included information about developing countries in general. We searched academic databases and grey literature. We extracted information from each article in the areas of design, manufacturing, distribution, service provision, and technology transfer. RESULTS: We identified commonly reported considerations and strategies for O&P provision from 431 articles. Analysis of expert consensus documents revealed recurring themes for improving O&P provision. We found that some suggestions from the consensus documents are being followed, but many are overlooked or have not yet been implemented. CONCLUSIONS: Areas for improvement include conducting field testing during the design process, providing services to rural environments, offering follow-up services, considering government collaboration, and encouraging an active role of the orthosis/prosthesis user. Outcomes and research studies will be further discussed in Part Two.