Jorba P, Haces F

Language: Spanish
References: 9
Page: 19-21
PDF size: 74.52 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objectives: To investigate the mid-term follow-up on the use of lower limb prosthetics in a group of patients managed in a pediatric orthopedic hospital that have been discharged; and to investigate the state of the prosthesis, the presence of symptoms, the working status and the need for additional surgeries. Material and methods: All patients seen in the prosthetics clinic at the Shriners Hospital for Children, from 1970 to 2001, and managed with a lower limb prosthetic, were identified. Eighty two patients were identified but only 11 were amenable to follow-up with a questionnaire that was applied. Results: Information was obtained for 11 patients with 13 prosthetics, with an average current age of 28.4 years (range: 25 to 32). Nine of them work. The average follow-up from admission to the Hospital to application of the questionnaire was 20.3 years (range: 12.2 to 27.4), with an average follow up of 8.6 years (range: 4.5 to 11.1) after discharge. All patients use their prosthetic every day, but 9 are damaged and the patients are unable to repair them. Eight patients have symptoms with the use of the prosthetic. Conclusions: This study highlights the difficulties in achieving mid- and long-term follow in this group of patients. Most of the patients have significantly damaged prosthesis, but continue to use them most of the day, as they depend on them completely for their daily activities.

REFERENCES

1. Ferriero G, Dughi D, Orlandini D, Moscato T, Nicita D, Franchignoni F. Measuring long-term outcome in people with lower limb amputation: cross-validation of the italian versions of the prosthetic profile of the amputee and prosthesis evaluation questionnaire. Eura Medicophys 2005; 41(1): 1-6.

2. Dougherty PJ. Long-term follow-up of unilateral transfemoral amputes from the Vietnam war. J Trauma 2003; 54(4): 718-23.

3. Sapp L, Little CE. Functional outcomes in a lower limb amputee population. Prosthet Orthot Int 1995; 19(2): 92-6.

4. Dillingham TR, Pezzin LE, MacKenzie EJ, burgess AR. Use and satisfaction with prosthetic devices among persons with trauma-related amputations: a long-term outcome study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2001; 80(8): 563-71.

5. Boonstra AM, Rijnders LJ, Groothoff JW, Eisma WH. Children with congenital deficiencies or acquired amputations of the lower limbs: functional aspects. Prosthet Orthot Int 2000; 24(1): 19-27.

6. Gauthier-Gagnon C, Grise MC, Potvin D. Enabling factors related to prosthetic use by people with transtibial and transfemoral amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80(6): 706-13.

7. Vannah WM, Davids JR, Drvaric DM, Setoguchi Y, Oxley BJ. A survey of function in children with lower limb deficiencies. Prosthet Orthot Int 1999; 23(3): 239-44.

8. Loder RT, Dikos GD, Taylor DA. Long-term lower extremity prosthetic costs in children with traumatic lawnmower amputations. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2004; 158: 1177-81.

9. Haboubi NH, Heelis M, Woodruff R, Al-Khawaja I. The effect of body weight and age on frequency of repairs in lower-limb prostheses. J Rehabil Res Dev 2001; 38(4): 375-7.