A Longitudinal Study of Social Participation After Dysvascular Lower Extremity Amputation.
Ann Marie Roepke, Rhonda M Williams, Aaron P Turner and 5 others
PMID 28368897WHAT IT FOUND
One year after dysvascular lower limb amputation, veterans reported low social participation.
Better mobility, mental status, and lower amputation level were associated with participation; social support was associated with satisfaction.
Key findings
01One year after amputation, participants reported low social participation on a 0 to 36 scale.
02Better premorbid mobility, better baseline mental status, and lower amputation level were associated with higher social participation at 12 months.
03Greater satisfaction with participation at 12 months was associated with greater baseline social support.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 68 of the 113 enrolled participants completed both baseline and 12-month social participation assessments. Participants included in the analysis had more depressive symptoms and higher marriage rates than those with missing data. The social participation measure was a modified Community Integration Questionnaire and was not fully validated in this form. The sample was limited to male US veterans with dysvascular amputation, mostly below the knee, and excluded people with inadequate cognitive function, nonambulatory before amputation, planned bilateral amputation, previous amputation, or death in the first year. The study was observational, so it cannot show that changing mobility, mental status, or social support causes better participation. Physical and social environment details were not collected.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that improving mobility, mental status, or social support will increase participation or satisfaction after amputation. This was an observational cohort analysis, so it reports associations, not treatment effects.