Prosthesis evaluation questionnaire for persons with lower limb amputations: Assessing prosthesis-related quality of life

261Citations
Citations of this article
275Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To develop a self-report questionnaire for persons with lower limb amputations who use a prosthesis. The resulting scales were intended to be suitable to evaluate the prosthesis and life with the prosthesis. The conceptual framework was health-related quality of life. Design: Multiple steps of scale development, terminating with test-retest of the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) by mail. Source of Sample: Records from two Seattle hospitals. Patients: Ninety-two patients with lower limb amputations who varied by age, reason for amputation, years since amputation, and amputation level. Main Outcome Measures: The 10 scales used were 4 prosthesis function scales (Usefulness, Residual Limb Health, Appearance, and Sounds), 2 mobility scales (Ambulation and Transfers), 3 psychosocial scales (Perceived Responses, Frustration, and Social Burden), and 1 Well-being scale. Validation measures were the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36, the Social Interaction subscale from the Sickness Impact Profile, and the Profile of Mood States-short form. Results: Nine PEQ scales demonstrated high internal consistency. All met test-retest criteria for comparing group results. Validity was described based on methods used to gather original items, distribution of scores, and comparison of scores with criterion variables. Conclusions: The PEQ scales displayed good psychometric properties. Future work will assess responsiveness of PEQ scales to changes in prosthetic components. We conclude that they will be useful in evaluation of prosthetic care.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Legro, M. W., Reiber, G. D., Smith, D. G., Del Aguila, M., Larsen, J., & Boone, D. (1998). Prosthesis evaluation questionnaire for persons with lower limb amputations: Assessing prosthesis-related quality of life. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 79(8), 931–938. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(98)90090-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free