Characterizing mobility from the prosthetic limb user's perspective: Use of focus groups to guide development of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility.
Brian J Hafner, Sara J Morgan, Daniel C Abrahamson and 1 others
PMID 25944625WHAT IT FOUND
People with lower limb prostheses described mobility as shaped by their health, the movements they do, and the environment.
Walking, changing posture, uneven ground, carrying loads, and talking while walking were described as limits.
Key findings
01Participants grouped prosthetic mobility into three themes: individual characteristics, forms of movement, and environmental situations.
02Forms of movement included continuous motions such as walking or running and postural changes such as sitting down in a confined space or squatting.
03Environmental situations included terrain, attentional demands, obstacles, distance or time, external loads, and ambient conditions.
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
The sample was small and purposively selected, so the themes may not represent all prosthetic limb users. Three of the 4 focus groups included investigators or observers who provided prosthetic care for some participants, which may have affected what participants said. Participants had to travel to a focus group location, be 18 years or older, read, write, and understand English, and not have conditions that would interfere with discussion, so people who could not meet these criteria were absent. The study generated themes and draft survey content; it did not test whether PLUS-M works or whether these questions change care. Strong personalities may have contributed disproportionately, although investigators encouraged all participants to speak and included short agreement responses.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that PLUS-M is a validated mobility measure or that these questions improve prosthetic mobility. The study used focus groups with 37 purposively selected participants to generate themes and draft survey content, not to test an intervention.