Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading  Processing Request

Systematic review of effects of current transtibial prosthetic socket designs--Part 2: Quantitative outcomes.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
  • معلومة اضافية
    • Author-Supplied Keywords:
      amputation
      patellar tendon bearing socket
      prosthesis
      PTB socket
      quantitative outcome
      socket
      total surface bearing socket
      transtibial
      TSB socket
      vacuum-assisted suction socket
      VAS socket
    • NAICS/Industry Codes:
      339110 Medical equipment and supplies manufacturing
      339113 Surgical Appliance and Supplies Manufacturing
      417930 Professional machinery, equipment and supplies merchant wholesalers
      325212 Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing
      325210 Resin and synthetic rubber manufacturing
      325211 Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing
      446199 All Other Health and Personal Care Stores
    • Abstract:
      This review is an attempt to untangle the complexity of transtibial prosthetic socket fit and perhaps find some indication of whether a particular prosthetic socket type might be best for a given situation. In addition, we identified knowledge gaps, thus providing direction for possible future research. We followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, using medical subject headings and standard key words to search for articles in relevant databases. No restrictions were made on study design and type of outcome measure used. From the obtained search results (n = 1,863), 35 articles were included. The relevant data were entered into a predefined data form that included the Downs and Black risk of bias assessment checklist. This article presents the results from the systematic review of the quantitative outcomes (n = 27 articles). Trends indicate that vacuum-assisted suction sockets improve gait symmetry, volume control, and residual limb health more than other socket designs. Hydrostatic sockets seem to create less inconsistent socket fittings, reducing a problem that greatly influences outcome measures. Knowledge gaps exist in the understanding of clinically meaningful changes in socket fit and its effect on biomechanical outcomes. Further, safe and comfortable pressure thresholds under various conditions should be determined through a systematic approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
    • Abstract:
      Copyright of Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development is the property of VA Prosthetics Research & Development Center and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
    • Author Affiliations:
      1Department of Orthotics and Prosthetics, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran
      2Department for Occupational Therapy, Prosthetics, and Orthotics, Faculty of Health Sciences, Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences, Oslo, Norway
    • ISSN:
      0748-7711
    • Accession Number:
      10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0184
    • Accession Number:
      110306344
  • Citations
    • ABNT:
      SAFARI, M. R.; MEIER, M. R. Systematic review of effects of current transtibial prosthetic socket designs--Part 2: Quantitative outcomes. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, [s. l.], v. 52, n. 5, p. 509–526, 2015. DOI 10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0184. Disponível em: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=asn&AN=110306344&custid=s8280428. Acesso em: 30 nov. 2020.
    • AMA:
      Safari MR, Meier MR. Systematic review of effects of current transtibial prosthetic socket designs--Part 2: Quantitative outcomes. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development. 2015;52(5):509-526. doi:10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0184
    • APA:
      Safari, M. R., & Meier, M. R. (2015). Systematic review of effects of current transtibial prosthetic socket designs--Part 2: Quantitative outcomes. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 52(5), 509–526. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0184
    • Chicago/Turabian: Author-Date:
      Safari, Mohammad Reza, and Margrit Regula Meier. 2015. “Systematic Review of Effects of Current Transtibial Prosthetic Socket Designs--Part 2: Quantitative Outcomes.” Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development 52 (5): 509–26. doi:10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0184.
    • Harvard:
      Safari, M. R. and Meier, M. R. (2015) ‘Systematic review of effects of current transtibial prosthetic socket designs--Part 2: Quantitative outcomes’, Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 52(5), pp. 509–526. doi: 10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0184.
    • Harvard: Australian:
      Safari, MR & Meier, MR 2015, ‘Systematic review of effects of current transtibial prosthetic socket designs--Part 2: Quantitative outcomes’, Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, vol. 52, no. 5, pp. 509–526, viewed 30 November 2020, .
    • MLA:
      Safari, Mohammad Reza, and Margrit Regula Meier. “Systematic Review of Effects of Current Transtibial Prosthetic Socket Designs--Part 2: Quantitative Outcomes.” Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, vol. 52, no. 5, June 2015, pp. 509–526. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0184.
    • Chicago/Turabian: Humanities:
      Safari, Mohammad Reza, and Margrit Regula Meier. “Systematic Review of Effects of Current Transtibial Prosthetic Socket Designs--Part 2: Quantitative Outcomes.” Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development 52, no. 5 (June 2015): 509–26. doi:10.1682/JRRD.2014.08.0184.
    • Vancouver/ICMJE:
      Safari MR, Meier MR. Systematic review of effects of current transtibial prosthetic socket designs--Part 2: Quantitative outcomes. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development [Internet]. 2015 Jun [cited 2020 Nov 30];52(5):509–26. Available from: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=asn&AN=110306344&custid=s8280428