Changes in mobility after community-based prosthesis fitting and rehabilitation in people with major lower limb amputations: a cohort study.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Inger Mechlenburg, Lisa Urup Tønning, Rikke Ørholst, Cecilie Iversen, Kajsa Lindberg, Morten Tange Kristensen
{"title":"Changes in mobility after community-based prosthesis fitting and rehabilitation in people with major lower limb amputations: a cohort study.","authors":"Inger Mechlenburg, Lisa Urup Tønning, Rikke Ørholst, Cecilie Iversen, Kajsa Lindberg, Morten Tange Kristensen","doi":"10.1177/02692155251336566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo investigate changes in mobility in adults with recent major lower limb amputation participating in community-based rehabilitation. Second, to assess the impact of amputation level (transtibial versus transfemoral) on mobility changes.DesignCohort study.SettingRehabilitation Centre in Copenhagen Municipality.SubjectsA total of 265 individuals with recent major lower limb amputations were prospectively recruited into a cohort from 2008 to 2022 as part of routine practice.MethodsFour physiotherapists collected data on age, sex, level of amputation (transtibial/transfemoral) and assessed mobility at start of walking out of parallel handrail (baseline) and at the end (follow-up) of rehabilitation. Mobility was assessed with the Timed-Up-and-Go test, 10-Meter Walk test, and 2-Minute Walk test. The impact of amputation level was analyzed using multivariable linear regression adjusted for age and sex.ResultsA total of 199 individuals (153 men) mean age of 64.9 (standard deviation 12.2) years had baseline and follow-up mobility data and were eligible for the study. Mobility significantly improved on all tests for individuals with both amputation levels after community rehabilitation. Multivariable analysis showed that individuals with transfemoral amputations on average improved with 17.9 seconds more (95% confidence interval: 12.7-23.1) than transtibial completing the Timed-Up-and-Go test. Contrary, transtibial walked 0.11 meter/second faster (95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.20) and 7.2 meters (95% confidence interval: -1.4 to 15.8) longer in the 10-Meter Walk test and 2-Minute Walk test respectively than transfemoral amputees.ConclusionAdults with lower limb amputations improved their mobility significantly from baseline to follow-up. Individuals with transfemoral amputations improved more than transtibial amputations on functional mobility.</p>","PeriodicalId":10441,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"2692155251336566"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155251336566","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveTo investigate changes in mobility in adults with recent major lower limb amputation participating in community-based rehabilitation. Second, to assess the impact of amputation level (transtibial versus transfemoral) on mobility changes.DesignCohort study.SettingRehabilitation Centre in Copenhagen Municipality.SubjectsA total of 265 individuals with recent major lower limb amputations were prospectively recruited into a cohort from 2008 to 2022 as part of routine practice.MethodsFour physiotherapists collected data on age, sex, level of amputation (transtibial/transfemoral) and assessed mobility at start of walking out of parallel handrail (baseline) and at the end (follow-up) of rehabilitation. Mobility was assessed with the Timed-Up-and-Go test, 10-Meter Walk test, and 2-Minute Walk test. The impact of amputation level was analyzed using multivariable linear regression adjusted for age and sex.ResultsA total of 199 individuals (153 men) mean age of 64.9 (standard deviation 12.2) years had baseline and follow-up mobility data and were eligible for the study. Mobility significantly improved on all tests for individuals with both amputation levels after community rehabilitation. Multivariable analysis showed that individuals with transfemoral amputations on average improved with 17.9 seconds more (95% confidence interval: 12.7-23.1) than transtibial completing the Timed-Up-and-Go test. Contrary, transtibial walked 0.11 meter/second faster (95% confidence interval: 0.02-0.20) and 7.2 meters (95% confidence interval: -1.4 to 15.8) longer in the 10-Meter Walk test and 2-Minute Walk test respectively than transfemoral amputees.ConclusionAdults with lower limb amputations improved their mobility significantly from baseline to follow-up. Individuals with transfemoral amputations improved more than transtibial amputations on functional mobility.

下肢截肢患者社区义肢安装和康复后活动能力的变化:一项队列研究。
目的探讨近期下肢大截肢成人参与社区康复后活动能力的变化。其次,评估截肢水平(经胫与经股)对活动能力变化的影响。DesignCohort研究。哥本哈根市立康复中心。作为常规实践的一部分,从2008年到2022年,共有265名近期下肢截肢的个体被前瞻性地招募到一个队列中。方法4名物理治疗师收集患者的年龄、性别、截肢程度(经胫/经股骨),并评估患者从平行扶手行走开始时(基线)和康复结束时(随访)的活动能力。活动能力通过计时起身测试、10米步行测试和2分钟步行测试进行评估。采用调整年龄和性别的多变量线性回归分析截肢水平的影响。结果共有199人(153名男性)平均年龄64.9岁(标准差12.2),具有基线和随访活动能力数据,符合研究条件。社区康复后,两种截肢水平的个体在所有测试中的活动能力都有显著改善。多变量分析显示,经股截肢患者比经胫截肢患者平均多改善17.9秒(95%可信区间:12.7-23.1)。相反,在10米步行测试和2分钟步行测试中,经胫骨步行比经股骨截肢者分别快0.11米/秒(95%置信区间:0.02-0.20)和7.2米(95%置信区间:-1.4 - 15.8)。结论下肢截肢患者的活动能力从基线到随访有明显改善。经股骨截肢比经胫骨截肢更能改善个体的功能活动能力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Rehabilitation
Clinical Rehabilitation 医学-康复医学
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
117
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Rehabilitation covering the whole field of disability and rehabilitation, this peer-reviewed journal publishes research and discussion articles and acts as a forum for the international dissemination and exchange of information amongst the large number of professionals involved in rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信