Abstract
Introduction
Rehabilitation of traumatic upper limb amputees depends on a multitude of factors. This study attempts to evaluate the success of prosthetic rehabilitation in this group of patients, determine the reasons for non-compliance and find ways to increase prosthetic acceptance.
Materials and methods
The prosthetic rehabilitation status of 71 traumatic upper-limb amputees was assessed by a questionnaire and clinical review. A Prosthetic Rehabilitation Scoring (PRS) system, based on patient satisfaction, prosthetic usage and activity level, was devised to quantify the success of rehabilitation.
Results
The rehabilitation was found to be equally good in above-elbow and below-elbow amputees. The delay in fitting of the prosthesis had no correlation with successful rehabilitation. Chances of successful rehabilitation decreased when the prosthesis fitting was done in older patients. The main reasons for inadequate use of the prosthesis were repeated mechanical failure and the high cost of repair and replacement.
Conclusion
In order to achieve an optimum benefit for the patient in a developing country, the prosthesis should be durable, inexpensive and have a low cost of maintenance.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Atkins DJ, Heard DCY, Donovan WH (1996) Epidemiologic overview of individuals with upper-limb loss and their reported research priorities. J Prosthet Orthot 8:2–11
Beasley RW (1981) General considerations in managing upper limb amputations. Orthop Clin North Am 12:743–749
Beasley RW, Bese GM de (1986) Upper limb amputations and prostheses. Orthop Clin North Am 17:395–405
Burkhalter WE, Carmona LS (1976) The upper-extremity amputee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 58:46–51
Gaine WJ, Smart C, Bransby-Zachary M (1997) Upper limb traumatic amputees—review of prosthetic use. J Hand Surg Br 22:73–76
Kejlaa GH (1993) Consumer concerns and the functional value of prostheses to upper limb amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int 17:157–163
Lamb DW, Scott H (1981) Management of congenital and acquired amputation in children. Orthop Clin North Am 12:977–994
Law HT (1981) Engineering of upper limb prostheses. Orthop Clin North Am 12:929–951
Scotland TR, Galway HR (1983) A long-term review of children with congenital and acquired upper limb deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Br 65:346–349
Sturup J, Thyregod HC, Jensen JS et al (1988) Traumatic amputation of the upper limb: the use of body powered prostheses and employment consequences. Prosthet Orthot Int 12:50–52
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the technical assistance given by Dr.Sreekumaran Nair (Department of Community Medicine), Mr. P. Balasubramaniam and Mr. K. Satishan (Department of Orthotics and Prosthetics).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bhaskaranand, K., Bhat, A.K. & Acharya, K.N. Prosthetic rehabilitation in traumatic upper limb amputees (an Indian perspective). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 123, 363–366 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-003-0546-4
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-003-0546-4