Hull early walking aid for rehabilitation of transtibial amputees - randomized controlled trial (HEART)

Full text for this resource is not available from the Research Repository.

Mazari, Fayyaz Ali Khan, Mockford, Katherine, Barnett, Cleveland T, Khan, Junaid A, Brown, Barbara, Smith, Lynne, Polman, Remco, Hancock, Amanda, Vanicek, Natalie K and Chetter, Ian C (2010) Hull early walking aid for rehabilitation of transtibial amputees - randomized controlled trial (HEART). Journal of Vascular Surgery, 6 (52). pp. 1564-1571. ISSN 0741-5214 (print) 1097-6809 (online)

Abstract

Purpose To compare articulated and nonarticulated early walking aids (EWAs) for clinical and quality-of-life outcomes in transtibial amputees. Methods Patients undergoing lower limb amputation in a tertiary-care vascular surgical unit were screened over a 4-year period. Recruited patients were randomized to receive articulated amputee mobility aid (AMA) or nonarticulated pneumatic postamputation mobility aid (PPAMA) during early rehabilitation. Primary (10-meter walking velocity) and secondary clinical (number and duration of physiotherapy treatments during EWA/prosthesis use) and quality-of-life (SF-36) outcome measures were recorded at five standardized assessment visits. Inter-group and intra-group analyses were performed. Results Two hundred seventy-two patients were screened and 29 transtibial amputees (median age, 56 years) were recruited (14/treatment arm). No significant difference was seen in demographics and comorbidities at baseline. Inter-group analysis: Median 10-meter walking velocity was significantly (Mann-Whitney, P = .020) faster in the PPAMA group (0.245 m/s, interquartile range [IQR] 0.218-0.402 m/s) compared with the AMA group (0.165 m/s; IQR, 0.118-0.265 m/s) at visit 1. However, there was no difference between the groups at any other visit. Similarly, the number of treatments using EWA was significantly (P = .045) lower in the PPAMA group (5.0; IQR, 3.5-8.0) compared with the AMA group (6.0; IQR, 6.0-10.5). No difference was observed between the groups in duration of physiotherapy or SF-36 domain and summary scores. Intra-group analysis: Both treatment groups showed significant improvement in 10-meter walking velocity (Friedman test; AMA P = .001; PPAMA P = .007); however, other clinical outcomes did not show any statistically significant improvement. Only physical function domain of SF-36 demonstrated significant improvement (Friedman test; AMA P = .037; PPAMA P = .029). Conclusions There is no difference in clinical and QOL outcomes between articulated and nonarticulated EWAs in rehabilitation of transtibial amputees.

Dimensions Badge

Altmetric Badge

Item type Article
URI https://vuir.vu.edu.au/id/eprint/7019
DOI https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2010.07.006
Subjects Historical > Faculty/School/Research Centre/Department > Institute of Sport, Exercise and Active Living (ISEAL)
Current > FOR Classification > 1103 Clinical Sciences
Historical > SEO Classification > 970111 Expanding Knowledge in the Medical and Health Sciences
Keywords ResPubID21064, ResPubID21944, walking aid, rehabilitation, transtibial amputees
Citations in Scopus 9 - View on Scopus
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Search Google Scholar

Repository staff login