Cycling in people with a lower limb amputation

4Citations
Citations of this article
55Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: To evaluate cycling participation and identify barriers and facilitators related to cycling participation in people with a lower limb amputation (LLA) in the Netherlands. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to adults with a LLA between March and August 2019 to obtain information regarding prosthesis, individual’s characteristics, amputation, cycling barriers and facilitators, and prosthetic satisfaction. The questionnaires were distributed via 8 orthopedic workshops, post and were given directly. To find cycling predictors, variables associated with cycling (p < 0.1) were entered into a logistic regression analysis. Non-significant variables were removed manually. Results: Participants (n = 207, 71% males) had a mean age of 62.0 ± 13.0 years. The most frequent level of amputation was transtibial (42%), and trauma was the most frequent cause of amputation (43%). After the LLA, 141 participants (68%) cycled for recreation (80%), physical fitness (74%), and transport (50%). In the past six months, cyclists cycled for recreation (79%) and transport (66%). Most cycled less than once a day. Recreational cyclists cycled alone (75%) for a median duration of 45 min or 14 km per ride. Cyclists with a transportation purpose usually cycled to go shopping (80%) or to visit friends (68%), with a median duration of 20 min or five kilometers per ride. Cyclists reported more facilitators (median (IQR) = 5 (3, 7) than non-cyclists 0 (0, 3). The majority of cyclists reported a positive attitude toward cycling (89%) and cycled because of health benefits (81%). A dynamic foot (odds ratio: 5.2, 95% CI 2.0, 13.3) and a higher number of facilitators (odds ratio: 1.3, 95% CI 1.2, 1.5) positively predicted cycling, whereas the presence of other underlying diseases (odds ratio: 0.4, 95% CI 0.2, 0.9) negatively predicted cycling (R2: 40.2%). Conclusion: In the Netherlands, the majority of adults cycled after a LLA, mainly for recreational purposes. A dynamic foot, a higher number of facilitators, and no other underlying diseases increases the likelihood of cycling after a LLA. The results suggest that personal motivation and a higher mobility level could be the key to increasing cycling participation. Future research should determine the association between motivation, mobility levels, and cycling with a LLA.

References Powered by Scopus

Back-translation for cross-cultural research

9697Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration

3509Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Information bias in health research: Definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods

1787Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Biomechanical effects of saddle height changes in leisure cycling with unilateral transtibial prostheses: A simulated study

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

OVERCOMING BARRIERS TO CYCLING FOR KNEE DISARTICULATION AND TRANSFEMORAL PROSTHESIS USERS: A PILOT STUDY IN THE NETHERLANDS

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Joint Movement Assessment Applied to Unilateral Amputee Cycling

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Poonsiri, J., Dekker, R., Dijkstra, P. U., Hijmans, J. M., & Geertzen, J. H. B. (2021). Cycling in people with a lower limb amputation. BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-021-00302-3

Readers over time

‘19‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2505101520

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 7

54%

Researcher 3

23%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

15%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

8%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Nursing and Health Professions 7

41%

Sports and Recreations 5

29%

Medicine and Dentistry 3

18%

Engineering 2

12%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0