Socket Versus Bone-Anchored Trans-Femoral Prostheses
Open Access
- 1 August 2005
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Prosthetics and Orthotics International
- Vol. 29 (2), 153-163
- https://doi.org/10.1080/03093640500238014
Abstract
This is the first study to report on hip range of motion (ROM) among active prosthesis users, when wearing and not wearing a trans-femoral socket prosthesis and to compare with individuals rehabilitated with an osseointegrated bone-anchored prosthesis. In addition, discomfort when sitting with the prosthesis is reported in both groups. The study group all had a non-vascular amputation and were divided into those supplied with a socket prosthesis (S group) (n = 43, mean age 51 years, 74% men) or a bone-anchored prosthesis (OI group) (n = 20, mean age 46 years, 75% men). Active hip ROM was measured with a goniometer, and self-reported problems with discomfort when sitting were recorded. The hip motion decreased in all directions when wearing the socket prosthesis compared to without it (P < 0.001 for all directions), and 37% of the subjects had less than 90° of hip flexion when wearing their prosthesis. Discomfort when sitting was reported among 44% (n = 19) in the S group and was more common among individuals with less than 90° of hip flexion motion (P = 0.025). In the OI group, no restriction in hip motion was measured with the prosthesis, and no subject had less than 90° of flexion and 5% (n = 1) reported discomfort when sitting. This study shows that a trans-femoral prosthetic socket significantly reduces the ROM of the hip and that discomfort when sitting is common among individuals wearing such prostheses. Further, the study confirms that individuals using a bone-anchored prosthesis have no restricted hip motion with the prosthesis and report very few problems with discomfort when sitting.Keywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Use and satisfaction with prosthetic limb devices and related services 11No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit on the author(s) or on any organization with which the author(s) is/are associated.Archives Of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2004
- Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (Q-TFA): Initial validity and reliability of a new outcome measureJournal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 2004
- Passive hip rotation range of motion: effects of testing position and age in runners and non-runnersPhysiotherapy Theory and Practice, 2003
- Consequences of non-vascular trans-femoral amputationProsthetics and Orthotics International, 2001
- Use and Satisfaction with Prosthetic Devices Among Persons with Trauma-Related AmputationsAmerican Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, 2001
- Transfemoral Socket Design and Suspension OptionsPhysical Medicine and Rehabilitation Clinics of North America, 2000
- Rehabilitation and the long-term outcomes of persons with trauma-related amputationsArchives Of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2000
- Transfemoral AmputationClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 1999
- Current Transfemoral SocketsClinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 1999
- Normal Range of Motion of the Hip, Knee and Ankle Joints in Male Subjects, 30–40 Years of AgeActa Orthopaedica, 1982