Abstract-This study compared subjects' performance with a nonmicroprocessor knee mechanism (NMKM) versus a C-Leg on nine clinically repeatable evaluative measures. We recorded data on subjects' performance while they used an accommodated NMKM and, following a 90-day accommodation period, the C-Leg in a convenience sample of 19 transfemoral (TF) amputees (mean age 51 +/-19) from an outpatient prosthetic clinic. We found that use of the C-Leg improved function in all outcomes: (1) Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire scores increased 20% (p = 0.007), (2) stumbles decreased 59% (p = 0.006), (3) falls decreased 64% (p = 0.03), (4) 75 m selfselected walking speed on even terrain improved 15% (p = 0.03), (5) 75 m fastest possible walking speed (FPWS) on even terrain improved 12% (p = 0.005), (6) 38 m FPWS on uneven terrain improved 21% (p < 0.001), (7) 6 m FPWS on even terrain improved 17% (p = 0.001), (8) Montreal Rehabilitation Performance Profile Performance Composite Scores for stair descent increased for 12 subjects, and (9) the C-Leg was preferred over the NMKM by 14 subjects. Four limited community ambulators (Medicare Functional Classification Level [MFCL] K2) increased their ambulatory functional level to unlimited community ambulation (MFCL K3). Objective evaluative clinical measures are vital for justifying the medical necessity of knee mechanisms for TF amputees. Use of the C-Leg improves performance and quality of life and can increase MFCL and community ambulation level.

Little is known about the reasoning process clinicians use when prescribing wheeled mobility equipment (WME) or about the outcomes of this process, i.e., how many devices are prescribed, to whom, how often, and at what cost. This study characterized veterans who received WME from the Veterans Health Administration. We analyzed variance in wheelchair provision based on sex, race/ethnicity, diagnosis, and age. Three years of data from the National Prosthetics Patient Database and the National Patient Care Database were merged, yielding more than 77,000 observations per fiscal year. Logistic regression analysis revealed associations between WME provision and age, sex, and race/ethnicity, when analysis was controlled for diagnosis and number of comorbidities. Hispanics (odds ratio [OR] = 1.864), African Americans (OR = 1.360), and American Indians/Asians (OR = 1.585) were more likely than Caucasians to receive standard wheelchairs. Hispanics (OR = 0.4), African Americans (OR = 0.7), and American Indians/Asians (OR = 0.4) were less likely than Caucasians to receive scooters.

No abstract

Abstract-During fiscal years 2000 and 2001, the VeteransHealth Administration provided veterans with more than 131,000 wheelchairs and scooters at a cost of $109 million. This national study is the first to investigate Veterans Health Administration costs in providing wheelchairs and scooters and to compare regional prescription patterns. With a retrospective design, we used descriptive methods to analyze fiscal years 2000 and 2001 National Prosthetics Patient Database data (cleaned data set of 113,724 records). Wheelchairs were categorized by function, weight, and adjustability options for meeting individual needs (e.g., axle position, camber, position of wheels, tilt, and recline options). Results displayed a cost distribution that was negatively skewed by low-cost accessories coded as wheelchairs. Of the standard manual wheelchairs, 3.5% could be considered beyond the customary cost. Regionally, 71% to 86% of all wheelchairs provided were manual wheelchairs, 5% to 11% were power wheelchairs, and 5% to 20% were scooters. The considerable variation found in the types of wheelchairs and scooters provided across Veterans Integrated Service Networks may indicate a need for evidencebased prescription guidelines and clinician training in wheeledmobility technologies.

The intensive care unit (ICU) trauma population is at high risk for complications associated with immobility. The purpose of this project was to compare ICU trauma patient outcomes before and after implementation of a structured progressive mobility (PM) protocol. Outcomes included hospital and ICU stays, ventilator days, falls, respiratory failure, pneumonia, or venous thromboembolism (VTE). In the preintervention cohort, physical therapy (PT) consults were placed 53% of the time. This rose to more than 90% during the postintervention period. PT consults seen within 24 hr rose from a baseline 23% pre- to 74%-94% in the 2 highest compliance postintervention months. On average, 40% of patients were daily determined to be too unstable for mobility per protocol guidelines-most often owing to elevated intracranial pressure. During PM sessions, there were no adverse events (i.e., extubation, hypoxia, fall). There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between the 2 cohorts regarding hospital and ICU stays, average ventilator days, mortality, falls, respiratory failure, or pneumonia overall or within ventilated patients specifically. There was, however, a difference in the incidence of VTE between the preintervention cohort (21%) and postintervention cohort (7.5%) (p = .0004). A PM protocol for ICU trauma patients is safe and may reduce patient deconditioning and VTE complications in this high-risk population. Multidisciplinary commitment, daily protocol reinforcement, and active engagement of patients/families are the cornerstones to success in this ICU PM program.