What Matters Most: A Multi-Stakeholder Study of Outcome Domains in Lower-Limb Prosthesis Use
Ahmed, M. E.; Karlsson-Brown, S.; Koufaki, P.; Ahmadi, M.; Mico-Amigo, E. M.
Show abstract
Purpose: Lower-limb prosthesis use involves interacting physical, psychosocial, and device-related outcomes that may not be fully captured by conventional clinical assessment. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a stakeholder-informed framework of outcome domains relevant to meaningful everyday prosthesis use. Materials and Methods: A mixed-methods participatory design comprised a structured synthesis of selected clinically relevant content from five established patient-reported outcome measures; semi-structured interviews and importance and actionability ratings with 18 contributors (12 prosthesis users, four clinicians, and two industrial partners); and integration of the synthesis, qualitative, and rating findings. Interview records were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, and ratings were analysed descriptively. Results: The resulting framework comprised four interrelated domains: Mobility, Physical Function, Psychosocial Wellbeing, and Prosthesis Experience. Mobility showed the clearest convergence across stakeholder perspectives. Prosthesis users showed the largest importance actionability gap for Prosthesis Experience (4.5 vs 3.0), whereas clinicians showed the largest gap for Psychosocial Wellbeing (5.0 vs 3.0). Interviews highlighted day-to-day variability in prosthesis use and the influence of confidence, fatigue, comfort, environmental conditions, social context, and device usability. Conclusions: Meaningful outcome assessment in prosthetic rehabilitation should extend beyond mobility alone to consider physical function, psychosocial wellbeing, and prosthesis experience within everyday contexts. The proposed framework provides a stakeholder-informed foundation for multidimensional outcome assessment in prosthetic rehabilitation.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Experience of Adults with Upper-limb Difference and their Views on Sensory Feedback for Prostheses: A Mixed Methods Study 97%
- Design and Evaluation of a Bone-anchored, Neurally-controlled Knee Prosthesis 96%
- Comparison of vibrotactile and joint-torque feedback in a myoelectric upper-limb prosthesis 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development of the ECLIPSE model of meaningful outcome domains following lower limb amputation and prosthetic rehabilitation, through systematic review and best fit framework synthesis 96%
- Randomized, Crossover Clinical Trial on the Safety, Feasibility, and Usability of the ABLE Exoskeleton: A Comparative Study with Knee-Ankle-Foot Orthoses 95%
- What do blind people "see" with retinal prostheses? Observations and qualitative reports of epiretinal implant users 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Barriers and facilitators to implementing core osteoarthritis treatments in China: a mixed-method study 94%
- Doctors of chiropractic working with or within integrated health care delivery systems: a scoping review protocol 93%
- Anatomy of a Failure: Can a Cognitive-Bias Modification Intervention Improve Physical Activity in Patients Following a Cardiac Rehabilitation Programme? 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Development and content validation of a questionnaire identifying patients’ functional priorities and abilities after hip or knee arthroplasty 95%
- Physiotherapists’ use of aerobic exercise during stroke rehabilitation: a qualitative study using chart-stimulated recall 93%
- Current Practice and Challenges in Screening for Visual Perception Deficits after Stroke: a Qualitative Study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Motivational Strategies for Stroke Rehabilitation: A Delphi Study 93%
- Fall Injury Avoidance Strategy Scale (FIAS): Development and Validation of a Scale to Quantify Fall-Related Protective Movements 92%
- Using remotely delivered Spring Forest Qigong™ to reduce neuropathic pain in adults with spinal cord injury: A non-randomized controlled trial 90%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.