A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions

Healy, Aoife; Farmer, Sybil E.; Pandyan, Anand; Chockalingam, Nachiappan

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0192094

Cited by 62 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 247 publications

(269 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although some present scientific studies do not provide sufficient arguments in order to draw strong conclusions on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of orthotic devices [8], we sustain the importance of using high quality orthoses in rehabilitation medicine. There are many researches that point out the utility of orthotic intervention in scoliosis, knee deformities and rheumatoid arthritis [9][10][11][12].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

The necessity of using high quality orthoses in rehabilitation medicine

Amăricăi

2018

MATEC Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In rehabilitation medicine there is increasing need of using high quality orthoses that can provide either good stability of the joint or good correction of the postural defect. The advantages of using orthoses that are in the same time hypoallergenic, lightweight, flexible, resistant and durable over time should be considered when prescribing them in clinical practice. This study presents different types of orthoses and the necessity of proper selection of materials when choosing the best ones. We included 34 patients diagnosed with different musculoskeletal conditions (thoracic and thoraco-lumbar scoliosis, genu valgum deviation and rheumatoid arthritis) that required the use of special orthoses (thoraco-lumbar braces, knee or hand orthoses). Patients were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding the quality of the orthoses that they have been used. The following characteristics of an orthosis should be considered when choosing the right one: easily wearable, comfortable, offering good stability of a joint, high quality, lightweight, hypoallergenic and resistant.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 70%

The necessity of using high quality orthoses in rehabilitation medicine

Amăricăi

2018

MATEC Web Conf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whilst, this study provides a general overview on the breadth of high-level published research which has examined the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic provision, further in-depth analysis of the studies identified within this scoping study needs to be completed. Following on from the findings of this scoping study, a systematic review on prosthetic and orthotic interventions has been published [16].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The following 14 databases were searched: Web of Science, Medline, PubMed, CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Rehabdata, PsycInfo, ERIC, Education Research Complete, Business Source Complete, IEEE, NIHR and CEA Registry. MeSH headings and free text terms for orthotics and prosthetics were used along with study design categories to capture all research in the area of orthotics and prosthetics (sample search strategy for MEDLINE is provided elsewhere [16].. No language restriction was applied to the search. Searches were adapted for each database and were completed between 22nd and 27th September 2015.…”

Section: Data Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping literature review of studies assessing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions

Healy

Farmer

Eddison

et al. 2019

Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Approximately 1.5% of the world's population (~100 million people) need a prosthesis/orthosis. The objective of the study was to establish an overview of the literature that has examined prosthetic and orthotic interventions with a view to inform policy development.Methods: Fourteen databases were searched from 1995-2015. Studies reporting primary research on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions were examined. Metadata and information on study characteristics were extracted from the included studies.Results: The searches resulted in a total of 28,958 articles, a focus on studies with the words "randomised" OR "randomized" OR "cost" OR "economic" in their citation reduced this total to 2,644. Research has predominantly been conducted in Australia, Canada, Germany, Netherlands, UK and USA. 346 randomised controlled trials were identified, with only four randomised controlled trials examining prosthetic interventions. The majority of research examined lower limb orthoses in the adult population and used a wide range of outcome measures. Conclusions: While various international organisations have highlighted the value of providing prosthetic and orthotic services, both to the user and society as a whole, the availability of scientific research to inform policy is limited. Future structured evaluation of prosthetic and orthotic interventions/services is warranted to inform future policy developments.

show abstract

“…Small sample-size is a common issue in the field of prosthetics, as it is difficult to recruit large participant cohorts from the small limb-absent population. 118 One way to help address this issue is to develop a commonly-agreed framework for reporting participant characteristics, clinical outcomes and the engineering characteristics of the components tested, so that comparisons can be made across studies and the foundations laid for big data approaches. 119 Strengthening the partnerships and collaborations between academic institutions, the prosthetics industry, clinics, hospitals and societies of people with limb absence is important for ensuring research is informed by an understanding of the users' needs, and that the research outputs inform changes in clinical practice.…”

Section: Comparing Prosthetic Components and Intervention Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell¹,

Diment²,

Amigo³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundUnderstanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper- and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis-users during daily-living.Results60 lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lower-limb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm.ConclusionsActivity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user’s requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.

show abstract

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials assessing effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions

Cited by 62 publications

References 247 publications

The necessity of using high quality orthoses in rehabilitation medicine

The necessity of using high quality orthoses in rehabilitation medicine

A scoping literature review of studies assessing effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of prosthetic and orthotic interventions

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About