{"title":"微处理器控制和机械膝关节假体对单侧经股截肢者活动能力和生活质量的影响。","authors":"Mustafa Gültekin, Özlem Ülger, Z Candan Algun","doi":"10.1080/10400435.2025.2565295","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mobility level is considered the primary factor for determining the effectiveness of a prosthesis. This study aimed to establish whether mobility and quality of life (QoL) are improved with a microprocessor-controlled knee (MPK) compared with a non-microprocess-controlled knee (non-MPK). Participants who have undergone transfemoral amputation (TFA), aged between 20 and 60 years, and using prosthesis for at least 1 year were included in the study. Participants were divided into two groups according to the use of MPK (<i>n</i> = 35) and non-MPK (<i>n</i> = 28) prosthesis. The PLUS-M criteria was used to score mobility, while the Trinity Amputation and Prosthetic Experience Scales-TAPES was used for classifying QoL. Mobility was higher for MPK prosthesis compared with non-MPK (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Regarding QoL, while there was no difference between the groups for psychosocial adaptation sub-score (<i>p</i> > 0.05), but the group using MPK prosthesis were higher in terms of activity restriction and total TAPES score (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Our data shows that the type of knee joint used by participants with TFA has an effect on their QoL and mobility. Participants using MPK had better mobility, higher sub-scores related to activity restriction, and sub-scores of the QoL compared with non-MPK.</p>","PeriodicalId":51568,"journal":{"name":"Assistive Technology","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The effect of microprocessor-controlled and mechanical knee joint prostheses on mobility and quality of life in unilateral transfemoral amputees.\",\"authors\":\"Mustafa Gültekin, Özlem Ülger, Z Candan Algun\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10400435.2025.2565295\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Mobility level is considered the primary factor for determining the effectiveness of a prosthesis. This study aimed to establish whether mobility and quality of life (QoL) are improved with a microprocessor-controlled knee (MPK) compared with a non-microprocess-controlled knee (non-MPK). Participants who have undergone transfemoral amputation (TFA), aged between 20 and 60 years, and using prosthesis for at least 1 year were included in the study. Participants were divided into two groups according to the use of MPK (<i>n</i> = 35) and non-MPK (<i>n</i> = 28) prosthesis. The PLUS-M criteria was used to score mobility, while the Trinity Amputation and Prosthetic Experience Scales-TAPES was used for classifying QoL. Mobility was higher for MPK prosthesis compared with non-MPK (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Regarding QoL, while there was no difference between the groups for psychosocial adaptation sub-score (<i>p</i> > 0.05), but the group using MPK prosthesis were higher in terms of activity restriction and total TAPES score (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Our data shows that the type of knee joint used by participants with TFA has an effect on their QoL and mobility. Participants using MPK had better mobility, higher sub-scores related to activity restriction, and sub-scores of the QoL compared with non-MPK.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51568,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Assistive Technology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Assistive Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2025.2565295\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Assistive Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10400435.2025.2565295","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
The effect of microprocessor-controlled and mechanical knee joint prostheses on mobility and quality of life in unilateral transfemoral amputees.
Mobility level is considered the primary factor for determining the effectiveness of a prosthesis. This study aimed to establish whether mobility and quality of life (QoL) are improved with a microprocessor-controlled knee (MPK) compared with a non-microprocess-controlled knee (non-MPK). Participants who have undergone transfemoral amputation (TFA), aged between 20 and 60 years, and using prosthesis for at least 1 year were included in the study. Participants were divided into two groups according to the use of MPK (n = 35) and non-MPK (n = 28) prosthesis. The PLUS-M criteria was used to score mobility, while the Trinity Amputation and Prosthetic Experience Scales-TAPES was used for classifying QoL. Mobility was higher for MPK prosthesis compared with non-MPK (p < 0.05). Regarding QoL, while there was no difference between the groups for psychosocial adaptation sub-score (p > 0.05), but the group using MPK prosthesis were higher in terms of activity restriction and total TAPES score (p < 0.05). Our data shows that the type of knee joint used by participants with TFA has an effect on their QoL and mobility. Participants using MPK had better mobility, higher sub-scores related to activity restriction, and sub-scores of the QoL compared with non-MPK.
期刊介绍:
Assistive Technology is an applied, scientific publication in the multi-disciplinary field of technology for people with disabilities. The journal"s purpose is to foster communication among individuals working in all aspects of the assistive technology arena including researchers, developers, clinicians, educators and consumers. The journal will consider papers from all assistive technology applications. Only original papers will be accepted. Technical notes describing preliminary techniques, procedures, or findings of original scientific research may also be submitted. Letters to the Editor are welcome. Books for review may be sent to authors or publisher.