Use of Standardized Outcome Measures for People With Lower Limb Amputation: A Survey of Prosthetic Practitioners in the United States.

The sample was voluntary, and 134 of 509 responses were excluded, so the analysed group may not represent all certified prosthetic practitioners. The final sample was younger, had fewer years in practice, had more women, and had more master's degrees than the 2015 professional practice analysis sample. Almost all participants were certified prosthetists; few were prosthetic assistants, so results should not be generalized to assistants. Findings are based on self-reported practice, not observed chart review or testing, and the survey did not assess how data are collected, stored, or aggregated. People interested in outcome measurement may have been more likely to respond. The survey included only prosthetists and prosthetic assistants, not other team members such as physical therapists or physiatrists.

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The supplied publication types indicate NIH extramural research support, but the article text does not give a funding statement or say who designed the study.

Do not conclude that outcome measures are routinely used to guide prosthetic care. The survey found broad use, but routine use for clinical purposes was uncommon, and time, space, and inconsistent administration limited many performance tests.