4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Experts’ Perceived Patient Burden and Outcomes of Knee-ankle-foot-orthoses (Kafos) Vs. Microprocessor-stance-and-swing-phase-controlled-knee-ankle-foot Orthoses (Mp-sscos)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          BACKGROUND:

          Patients with neuromuscular knee-instability assisted with orthotic devices experience problems including pain, falls, mobility issues and limited engagement in daily activities.

          OBJECTIVES:

          The aim of this study was to analyse current real-life burden, needs and orthotic device outcomes in patients in need for advanced orthotic knee-ankle-foot-orthoses (KAFOs).

          METHODOLOGY:

          An observer-based semi-structured telephone interview with orthotic care experts in Germany was applied. Interviews were transcribed and content-analysed. Quantitative questions were analysed descriptively.

          FINDINGS:

          Clinical experts from eight centres which delivered an average of 49.9 KAFOs per year and 13.3 microprocessor-stance-and-swing-phase-controlled-knee-ankle-foot orthoses (MP-SSCOs) since product availability participated. Reported underlying conditions comprised incomplete paraplegia (18%), peripheral nerve lesions (20%), poliomyelitis (41%), post-traumatic lesions (8%) and other disorders (13%). The leading observed patient burdens were “restriction of mobility” (n=6), followed by “emotional strain” (n=5) and “impaired gait pattern” (n=4). Corresponding results for potential patient benefits were seen in “improved quality-of-life” (n=8) as well as “improved gait pattern” (n=8) followed by “high reliability of the orthosis” (n=7). In total, experts reported falls occurring in 71.5% of patients at a combined annual frequency of 7.0 fall events per year when using KAFOs or stance control orthoses (SCOs). In contrast, falls were observed in only 7.2 % of MPSSCO users.

          CONCLUSION:

          Advanced orthotic technology might contribute to better quality of life of patients, improved gait pattern and perceived reliability of orthosis. In terms of safety a substantial decrease in frequency of falls was observed when comparing KAFO and MP-SSCO users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Self-reports and general practitioner information on the presence of chronic diseases in community dwelling elderly. A study on the accuracy of patients' self-reports and on determinants of inaccuracy.

          The object of the study is to investigate the (in)accuracy of patients' self-reports, as compared with general practitioners' information, regarding the presence of specific chronic diseases, and the influence of patient characteristics. Questionnaire data of 2380 community-dwelling elderly patients, aged 55-85 years, on the presence of chronic non-specific lung disease, cardiac disease, peripheral atherosclerosis, stroke, diabetes, malignancies, and osteoarthritis/rheumatoid arthritis were compared with data from the general practitioners, using the kappa-statistic. Associations between the accuracy of self-reports and patient characteristics were studied by multiple logistic regression analyses. Kappa's ranged from 0.30 to 0.40 for osteoarthritis/rheumatoid arthritis and atherosclerosis, to 0.85 for diabetes mellitus. In the multivariate analyses, educational level, level of urbanization, deviations in cognitive function, and depressive symptomatology had no influence on the level of accuracy. An influence of gender, age, mobility limitations, and recent contact with the general practitioner was shown for specific diseases. For chronic non-specific lung disease, both "underreporting" and "overreporting" are more prevalent in males, compared to females. Furthermore, males tend to overreport stroke and underreport malignancies and arthritis, whereas females tend to overreport malignancies and arthritis. Both overreporting and underreporting of cardiac disease are more prevalent as people are older. Also, older age is associated with overreporting of stroke, and with underreporting of arthritis. The self-reported presence of mobility limitations is associated with overreporting of all specific diseases studied, except for diabetes mellitus, and its absence is associated with underreporting, except for diabetes mellitus and atherosclerosis. Recent contact with the general practitioner is associated with overreporting of cardiac disease, atherosclerosis, malignancies and arthritis, and with less frequent underreporting of diabetes and arthritis. Results suggest that patients' self-reports on selected chronic diseases are fairly accurate, with the exceptions of atherosclerosis and arthritis. The associations found with certain patient characteristics may be explained by the tendency of patients to label symptoms, denial by the patient, or inaccuracy of medical records.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Fear of falling and fall-related efficacy in relationship to functioning among community-living elders.

            The relationships of fear of falling and fall-related efficacy with measures of basic and instrumental activities of daily living (ADL-IADL) and physical and social functioning were evaluated in a cohort of community-living elderly persons. Sociodemographic, medical, psychological, and physical performance (e.g., gait speed, timed hand function) measures were administered, during an in-home assessment, to a probability sample of 1,103 residents of New Haven, Connecticut, who were > or = 72 years of age. Falls and injuries in the past year, fear of falling, and responses to the Falls Efficacy Scale were also ascertained. The three dependent variables included a 10-item ADL-IADL scale, an 8-item social activity scale, and a scale of relative physical activity level. Among cohort members, 57% denied fear of falling whereas 24% acknowledged fear but denied effect on activity; 19% acknowledged avoiding activities because of fear of falling. Twenty-four percent of recent fallers vs 15% of nonfallers acknowledged this activity restriction (chi 2 = 13.1; p < .001). Mean fall-related efficacy score among the cohort was 84.9 (SD 20.5), 79.8 (SD 23.4), and 88.1 (SD 17.9) among fallers and nonfallers, respectively (p < or = .0001). Fall-related efficacy proved a potent independent correlate of ADL-IADL (partial correlation = .265, p < .001); physical (partial correlation = .234, p < .001); and social (partial correlation = .088, p < .01), functioning in multiple regression models after adjusting for sociodemographic, medical, psychological, and physical performance covariates as well as history of recent falls and injuries. Fear of falling was only marginally related (p = .05) with ADL-IADL functioning and was not associated with higher level physical or social functioning. The strong independent association between self-efficacy and function found in this study suggests that clinical programs in areas such as prevention, geriatric evaluation and management, and rehabilitation should attempt simultaneously to improve physical skills and confidence. Available knowledge of the factors influencing efficacy should guide the development of these efficacy-building programs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Reducing Confusion about Grounded Theory and Qualitative Content Analysis: Similarities and Differences

              Although grounded theory and qualitative content analysis are similar in some respects, they differ as well; yet the differences between the two have rarely been made clear in the literature. The purpose of this article was to clarify ambiguities and reduce confusion about grounded theory and qualitative content analysis by identifying similarities and differences in the two based on a literature review and critical reflection on the authors’ own research. Six areas of difference emerged: (a) background and philosophical base, (b) unique characteristics of each method, (c) goals and rationale of each method, (d) data analysis process, (e) outcomes of the research, and (f) evaluation of trustworthiness. This article provides knowledge that can assist researchers and students in the selection of appropriate research methods for their inquiries.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: MethodologyRole: Formal analysisRole: Writing - original draftRole: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Role: Data curationRole: Writing - review & editingRole: Validation
                Journal
                Can Prosthet Orthot J
                Can Prosthet Orthot J
                cpoj
                Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal
                Canadian Online Publication Group (Ottawa, Canada )
                2561-987X
                25 February 2022
                2022
                : 5
                : 1
                : 37795
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Institute for Health Services Research and Technical Orthopedics, Orthopedic Department - Medical School Hannover (MHH) at DIAKOVERE Annastift Hospital, Hannover, Germany.
                [2 ] Klinik für Unfallchirurgie, Orthopädie und Plastische Chirurgie Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany.
                [3 ] RehaKlinikum Bad Rothenfelde, Klinik Münsterland, Bad Rothenfelde, Germany.
                [4 ] Abteilung Orthetik, Otto Bock HealthCare Deutschland GmbH, Göttingen, Germany.
                [5 ] Klinik für Konservative Orthopädie, Katholisches Klinikum Koblenz, Montabaur, Germany.
                [6 ] Orthopädie-Technik, Pohlig GmbH, Traunstein, Germany.
                [7 ] Technische Orthopädie, Seifert Technische Orthopädie GmbH, Bad Krozingen, Germany.
                [8 ] Fachklinik und Gesundheitszentrum, Johannesbad Raupennest GmbH & Co. KG, Altenberg, Germany.
                [9 ] Technische Orthopädie, Stiftung Orthopädische Universitätsklinikum, Heidelberg, Germany.
                [10 ] Foot Department and Technical Orthopedics, Orthopedic Department - Medical School Hannover (MHH) at DIAKOVERE Annastift Hospital, Hannover, Germany.
                Author notes
                *CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Prof. Dr. med. Bernd Brüggenjürgen Head Institute Health Services Research and Technical Orthopedics, Orthopedic Department - Medical School Hannover (MHH) at DIAKOVERE Annastift Hospital, Anna-von-Borries-Str. 1-7, 30625 Hannover, Germany. E-Mail: brueggenjuergen.bernd@ 123456mh-hannover.de
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8866-0809
                Article
                cpoj.v5i1.37795
                10.33137/cpoj.v5i1.37795
                10443469
                a3bb61e7-30d4-44da-b0ec-442820051136
                Copyright (c) 2022 Brüggenjürgen B., Braatz F., Greitemann B., Drewitz H., Ruetz A., Schäfer M., et al.

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 24 November 2021
                : 10 February 2022
                Categories
                Research Article

                knee instability,ankle foot orthoses,kafo,microprocessor orthoses,mp-sccos,poliomyelitis,patient burden,quality of life,survey

                Comments

                Comment on this article