Methods to assess lower limb prosthetic adaptation: a systematic review.
Natali Olaya-Mira, Luz Marina Gómez-Hernández, Carolina Viloria-Barragán and 1 others
PMID 40301975WHAT IT FOUND
Assessments of lower-limb prosthetic fit are inconsistent and often rely on tools not designed for amputees.
Questionnaires and functional tests are common but subjective. Objective measures like motion capture are precise but rarely used in clinics due to cost and training barriers.
Key findings
01Mobility evaluation is the primary predictor of physical adaptation, often surpassing residual limb characteristic assessments.
02Questionnaires and functional tests are the most popular assessment instruments, accounting for 57.8% of usage, but their subjective nature may introduce bias.
03Advanced tools like 3D scanners and motion capture offer precise measurements but are restricted to laboratory settings due to high costs and training requirements.
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 review included a limited number of studies (48). Many publications were excluded because they lacked information on prosthetic fitting. Findings cannot be generalized to individuals with partial foot amputations, disarticulations, or bilateral amputations, as these were excluded. Only studies published in English and Spanish were analyzed, potentially missing relevant publications. Included studies often had small sample sizes, heterogeneity, and non-randomized designs.
Declared interests
The paper reports 'Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't' in its publication types but does not list specific funding sources or author declarations of interest in the provided text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that the widely used questionnaires and functional tests provide a complete or objective picture of prosthetic fit. The review highlights that these tools are subjective and often not designed specifically for amputees, meaning they may miss critical biomechanical issues that only advanced laboratory equipment can detect.