Clinically Relevant Outcome Measures Following Limb Osseointegration; Systematic Review of the Literature

Munjed M. Al Muderis, William Y. Lu, Jiao Jiao Li, Kenton R Kaufman, Michael Orendurff, M. Jason Highsmith, Paul A. Lunseth, Jason T. Kahle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The current standard of care for an amputee is a socket-based prostheses. An osseointegrated implant (OI) is an alternative for prosthetic attachment. Osseointegration addresses reported problems related to wearing a socket interface, such as skin issues, discomfort, diminished function, quality of life, prosthetic use, and abandonment. The purpose of this report is to systematically review current literature regarding OI to identify and categorize the reported clinically relevant outcome measures, rate the quality of available evidence, and synthesize the findings. Data sources: A multidisciplinary team used PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methods. Search methodology was based on identifying clinically relevant articles. Three databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Study Selection: Clinical studies with aggregated data reporting at least 1 clinically relevant outcome measure were included. Data Extraction: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criterion was used for critical appraisal and recommendations. Conclusions: This review identified 21 clinically relevant observational studies. Outcome measures were categorized into the following 9 categories: vibratory stimulation, complications, biomechanics, economics, patient-reported outcome measures, electromyography, x-ray, physical functional performance, and energy consumption. This systematic review consisted of Level III and IV observational studies. Homogeneous outcome measures with strong psychometric properties across prospective studies do not exist to date. Higher-level, prospective, randomized, long-term, clinically relevant trials are needed to prove efficacy of OI compared with socket prosthetic attachment. Osseointegration was at least equivalent to sockets in most studies. In some cases, it was superior. Osseointegration represents a promising alternative to socket prosthetic attachments for extremity amputees. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)e64-e75
JournalJournal of Orthopaedic Trauma
Volume32
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 1 2018

Fingerprint

Osseointegration
Extremities
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Amputees
Observational Studies
Information Storage and Retrieval
Electromyography
Standard of Care
Biomechanical Phenomena
Psychometrics
PubMed
Prostheses and Implants
Meta-Analysis
Research Design
Economics
Quality of Life
X-Rays
Databases
Prospective Studies
Skin

Keywords

  • amputation
  • interface
  • prosthetic attachment
  • socket
  • transfemoral

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Clinically Relevant Outcome Measures Following Limb Osseointegration; Systematic Review of the Literature. / Al Muderis, Munjed M.; Lu, William Y.; Li, Jiao Jiao; Kaufman, Kenton R; Orendurff, Michael; Highsmith, M. Jason; Lunseth, Paul A.; Kahle, Jason T.

In: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma, Vol. 32, No. 2, 01.02.2018, p. e64-e75.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Al Muderis, Munjed M. ; Lu, William Y. ; Li, Jiao Jiao ; Kaufman, Kenton R ; Orendurff, Michael ; Highsmith, M. Jason ; Lunseth, Paul A. ; Kahle, Jason T. / Clinically Relevant Outcome Measures Following Limb Osseointegration; Systematic Review of the Literature. In: Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2018 ; Vol. 32, No. 2. pp. e64-e75.
@article{eebda6d4d7254227a342c60380b77fbd,
title = "Clinically Relevant Outcome Measures Following Limb Osseointegration; Systematic Review of the Literature",
abstract = "Objectives: The current standard of care for an amputee is a socket-based prostheses. An osseointegrated implant (OI) is an alternative for prosthetic attachment. Osseointegration addresses reported problems related to wearing a socket interface, such as skin issues, discomfort, diminished function, quality of life, prosthetic use, and abandonment. The purpose of this report is to systematically review current literature regarding OI to identify and categorize the reported clinically relevant outcome measures, rate the quality of available evidence, and synthesize the findings. Data sources: A multidisciplinary team used PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methods. Search methodology was based on identifying clinically relevant articles. Three databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Study Selection: Clinical studies with aggregated data reporting at least 1 clinically relevant outcome measure were included. Data Extraction: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criterion was used for critical appraisal and recommendations. Conclusions: This review identified 21 clinically relevant observational studies. Outcome measures were categorized into the following 9 categories: vibratory stimulation, complications, biomechanics, economics, patient-reported outcome measures, electromyography, x-ray, physical functional performance, and energy consumption. This systematic review consisted of Level III and IV observational studies. Homogeneous outcome measures with strong psychometric properties across prospective studies do not exist to date. Higher-level, prospective, randomized, long-term, clinically relevant trials are needed to prove efficacy of OI compared with socket prosthetic attachment. Osseointegration was at least equivalent to sockets in most studies. In some cases, it was superior. Osseointegration represents a promising alternative to socket prosthetic attachments for extremity amputees. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.",
keywords = "amputation, interface, prosthetic attachment, socket, transfemoral",
author = "{Al Muderis}, {Munjed M.} and Lu, {William Y.} and Li, {Jiao Jiao} and Kaufman, {Kenton R} and Michael Orendurff and Highsmith, {M. Jason} and Lunseth, {Paul A.} and Kahle, {Jason T.}",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/BOT.0000000000001031",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "e64--e75",
journal = "Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma",
issn = "0890-5339",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Clinically Relevant Outcome Measures Following Limb Osseointegration; Systematic Review of the Literature

AU - Al Muderis, Munjed M.

AU - Lu, William Y.

AU - Li, Jiao Jiao

AU - Kaufman, Kenton R

AU - Orendurff, Michael

AU - Highsmith, M. Jason

AU - Lunseth, Paul A.

AU - Kahle, Jason T.

PY - 2018/2/1

Y1 - 2018/2/1

N2 - Objectives: The current standard of care for an amputee is a socket-based prostheses. An osseointegrated implant (OI) is an alternative for prosthetic attachment. Osseointegration addresses reported problems related to wearing a socket interface, such as skin issues, discomfort, diminished function, quality of life, prosthetic use, and abandonment. The purpose of this report is to systematically review current literature regarding OI to identify and categorize the reported clinically relevant outcome measures, rate the quality of available evidence, and synthesize the findings. Data sources: A multidisciplinary team used PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methods. Search methodology was based on identifying clinically relevant articles. Three databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Study Selection: Clinical studies with aggregated data reporting at least 1 clinically relevant outcome measure were included. Data Extraction: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criterion was used for critical appraisal and recommendations. Conclusions: This review identified 21 clinically relevant observational studies. Outcome measures were categorized into the following 9 categories: vibratory stimulation, complications, biomechanics, economics, patient-reported outcome measures, electromyography, x-ray, physical functional performance, and energy consumption. This systematic review consisted of Level III and IV observational studies. Homogeneous outcome measures with strong psychometric properties across prospective studies do not exist to date. Higher-level, prospective, randomized, long-term, clinically relevant trials are needed to prove efficacy of OI compared with socket prosthetic attachment. Osseointegration was at least equivalent to sockets in most studies. In some cases, it was superior. Osseointegration represents a promising alternative to socket prosthetic attachments for extremity amputees. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

AB - Objectives: The current standard of care for an amputee is a socket-based prostheses. An osseointegrated implant (OI) is an alternative for prosthetic attachment. Osseointegration addresses reported problems related to wearing a socket interface, such as skin issues, discomfort, diminished function, quality of life, prosthetic use, and abandonment. The purpose of this report is to systematically review current literature regarding OI to identify and categorize the reported clinically relevant outcome measures, rate the quality of available evidence, and synthesize the findings. Data sources: A multidisciplinary team used PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methods. Search methodology was based on identifying clinically relevant articles. Three databases were searched: PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Study Selection: Clinical studies with aggregated data reporting at least 1 clinically relevant outcome measure were included. Data Extraction: The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criterion was used for critical appraisal and recommendations. Conclusions: This review identified 21 clinically relevant observational studies. Outcome measures were categorized into the following 9 categories: vibratory stimulation, complications, biomechanics, economics, patient-reported outcome measures, electromyography, x-ray, physical functional performance, and energy consumption. This systematic review consisted of Level III and IV observational studies. Homogeneous outcome measures with strong psychometric properties across prospective studies do not exist to date. Higher-level, prospective, randomized, long-term, clinically relevant trials are needed to prove efficacy of OI compared with socket prosthetic attachment. Osseointegration was at least equivalent to sockets in most studies. In some cases, it was superior. Osseointegration represents a promising alternative to socket prosthetic attachments for extremity amputees. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

KW - amputation

KW - interface

KW - prosthetic attachment

KW - socket

KW - transfemoral

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044043748&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044043748&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001031

DO - 10.1097/BOT.0000000000001031

M3 - Article

C2 - 29373379

AN - SCOPUS:85044043748

VL - 32

SP - e64-e75

JO - Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

JF - Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma

SN - 0890-5339

IS - 2

ER -