Functional outcome measures for pediatric upper limb deficiencies with and without prostheses: A systematic review and appraisal.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
Holly Cordray, Miguel Fiandeiro, Manisha Banala, Sarah L Struble, John R Vaile, Meagan Pehnke, J Michael King, Apurva S Shah, Shaun D Mendenhall
{"title":"Functional outcome measures for pediatric upper limb deficiencies with and without prostheses: A systematic review and appraisal.","authors":"Holly Cordray, Miguel Fiandeiro, Manisha Banala, Sarah L Struble, John R Vaile, Meagan Pehnke, J Michael King, Apurva S Shah, Shaun D Mendenhall","doi":"10.1097/PXR.0000000000000441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Effective orthopedic care/rehabilitation for pediatric upper limb deficiencies (ULDs) requires understanding how function and prosthetic control progress as the child develops. Psychometrically sound outcome measures are imperative. This systematic review critically appraised the instruments available for assessing upper limb function among children with ULDs. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched. Eligible studies evaluated instruments' validity, reliability, and/or responsiveness and included children under 18 years. Following PRISMA guidelines, multiple reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and rated psychometrics and evidence quality by the COnsensus-based Standards for selection of health Measurement INstruments methodology. Reviewers screened 2513 studies; 19 reports describing 4 performance-based tests and 6 patient-reported outcome measures were included. An ideal outcome measure for pediatric ULDs does not yet exist. For clinicians/researchers seeking a standardized observational assessment, the Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control (valid only for myoelectric prostheses) and Assisting Hand Assessment are the most promising options, showing the best feasibility and psychometrics. A modified Assisting Hand Assessment is under development for ULDs with or without prosthesis use. For clinicians/researchers seeking a more practical questionnaire that they can implement beyond the clinic, all existing options would benefit from revision and simplification. We provisionally recommend the 10-min, parent-reported Child Amputee Prosthetics Project-Functional Status Inventory. However, the preschooler version needs construct revisions, and all versions need reliability studies. Two well-known pediatric instruments, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System and Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument, are invalid for assessing upper limb function among patients with ULDs.</p>","PeriodicalId":49657,"journal":{"name":"Prosthetics and Orthotics International","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prosthetics and Orthotics International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PXR.0000000000000441","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Effective orthopedic care/rehabilitation for pediatric upper limb deficiencies (ULDs) requires understanding how function and prosthetic control progress as the child develops. Psychometrically sound outcome measures are imperative. This systematic review critically appraised the instruments available for assessing upper limb function among children with ULDs. PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus were searched. Eligible studies evaluated instruments' validity, reliability, and/or responsiveness and included children under 18 years. Following PRISMA guidelines, multiple reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and rated psychometrics and evidence quality by the COnsensus-based Standards for selection of health Measurement INstruments methodology. Reviewers screened 2513 studies; 19 reports describing 4 performance-based tests and 6 patient-reported outcome measures were included. An ideal outcome measure for pediatric ULDs does not yet exist. For clinicians/researchers seeking a standardized observational assessment, the Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control (valid only for myoelectric prostheses) and Assisting Hand Assessment are the most promising options, showing the best feasibility and psychometrics. A modified Assisting Hand Assessment is under development for ULDs with or without prosthesis use. For clinicians/researchers seeking a more practical questionnaire that they can implement beyond the clinic, all existing options would benefit from revision and simplification. We provisionally recommend the 10-min, parent-reported Child Amputee Prosthetics Project-Functional Status Inventory. However, the preschooler version needs construct revisions, and all versions need reliability studies. Two well-known pediatric instruments, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System and Pediatric Outcomes Data Collection Instrument, are invalid for assessing upper limb function among patients with ULDs.

使用和不使用假肢的儿童上肢缺陷的功能结果测量:系统回顾和评估。
儿童上肢缺陷(ULDs)的有效矫形护理/康复需要了解儿童发育过程中功能和假肢控制的进展情况。心理测量学上合理的结果测量是必要的。本系统综述批判性地评价了可用于评估ULDs儿童上肢功能的仪器。检索PubMed、Embase、CINAHL和Scopus。符合条件的研究评估了工具的效度、可靠性和/或反应性,并纳入了18岁以下的儿童。遵循PRISMA指南,多名审稿人独立筛选研究,提取数据,评估偏倚风险,并根据基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准对心理测量学和证据质量进行评级。审稿人筛选了2513项研究;纳入了19份报告,描述了4项基于性能的测试和6项患者报告的结果测量。目前还没有一种理想的儿童超长寿命结局测量方法。对于寻求标准化观察性评估的临床医生/研究人员来说,肌电控制能力评估(仅对肌电假肢有效)和辅助手评估是最有希望的选择,显示出最佳的可行性和心理测量学。现正为使用或不使用假体的自重肢拟订一份经修订的辅助手评估。对于临床医生/研究人员寻求一个更实用的问卷,他们可以在诊所之外实施,所有现有的选项都将受益于修订和简化。我们暂时推荐10分钟,家长报告的儿童截肢假肢项目功能状态清单。然而,学龄前版本需要进行结构修正,所有版本都需要进行信度研究。两种著名的儿科仪器,患者报告的结果测量信息系统和儿科结果数据收集仪器,对于评估ULDs患者的上肢功能无效。
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
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
13.30%
发文量
208
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Prosthetics and Orthotics International is an international, multidisciplinary journal for all professionals who have an interest in the medical, clinical, rehabilitation, technical, educational and research aspects of prosthetics, orthotics and rehabilitation engineering, as well as their related topics.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信