Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evidence-Based Amputee Rehabilitation: a Systematic Approach to the Restoration of Function in People with Lower Limb Loss

  • Amputation Rehabilitation (JM Cohen, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to illustrate how existing outcome measures and clinical models can be applied to outline an evidence-based rehabilitation program for people with lower limb loss (LLL). The use of outcome measures in rehabilitation in addition to providing a numeric value of a person’s rehabilitation status can identify patient-specific functional impairments, activity limitations, establish treatment goals, guide targeted treatment interventions, detect change over time, and classify patients and with some populations develop predictive models.

Recent Findings

The model for the rehabilitation of people with LLL is based on the Evidence-Based Amputee Rehabilitation program that uses outcome measures to identify patient-specific impairments and limitations, set realistic goals, and track change over time.

Summary

The standardized use of outcome measures and evidence-based patient care can be used to help guide best practices for post-amputation rehabilitation and prosthetic interventions, and care over the life span for people with LLL.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ABC:

Activities-Balance Confidence Scale

AMP:

Amputee Mobility Predictor

AMPPro:

Amputee Mobility Predictor with Prosthesis

AMPnoPRO:

Amputee Mobility Predictor without Prosthesis

AMP-B:

Amputee Mobility Predictor-Bilateral

BBS:

Berg Balance Scale

CDC:

Centers for Disease Control

CER:

Comparative Effectiveness Research

CHAMP:

Comprehensive High-level Activity Mobility Predictor

cTUG:

Component Timed-Up-and-Go test

EBAR:

Evidence-Based Amputee Rehabilitation

FSST:

Four-Square Step Test

LLL:

Lower limb loss

PBOM:

Performance-based Outcome Measures

PLUS-M:

Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility

PROM:

Patient-reported Outcome Measures

PROMIS-29:

Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System 29-Item Profile

TAPES-R:

Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales-Revised

TUG:

Timed-Up-and-Go test

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. • Balk EM, Gazula A, Markozannes G, Kimmel HJ, Saldanha IJ, Trikalinos TA, et al. Psychometric properties of functional, ambulatory, and quality of life instruments in lower limb amputees: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(12):2354–70. Finding from this systematic review summerizes the psychometric properties of outcome measure instruments for adults with lower limb loss, summerizing evidence determine to be genralizable to the United States Medicare population.

  2. Hawkins EJ, Riddick W. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of clinical performance-based outcome measures of walking for individuals with lower limb amputations: a systematic review. Phys Ther. 2018;98(12):1037–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Condie E, Scott H, Treweek S. Lower limb prosthetic outcome measures: a review of the literature 1995 to 2005. J Prosthet Orthot. 2006;18(6):P13–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Deathe AB, Wolfe DL, Devlin M, Hebert JS, Miller WC, Pallaveshi L. Selection of outcome measures in lower extremity amputation rehabilitation: ICF activities. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(18):1455–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kohler F, Cieza A, Stucki G, Geertzen J, Burger H, Dillon MP, et al. Developing core sets for persons following amputation based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health as a way to specify functioning. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2009;33(2):117–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Bohannon RW, Wang YC, Gershon RC. Two-minute walk test performance by adults 18 to 85 years: normative values, reliability, and responsiveness. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96(3):472–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Hawkins AT, Henry AJ, Crandell DM, Nguyen LL. A systematic review of functional and quality of life assessment after major lower extremity amputation. Ann Vasc Surg. 2014;28(3):763–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Miller R, Ambler GK, Ramirez J, Rees J, Hinchliffe R, Twine C, et al. Patient reported outcome measures for major lower limb amputation caused by peripheral artery disease or diabetes: a systematic review. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2021;61(3):491–501.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Xu J. A Core Set for people following lower limb amputation based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Signature. 2020;15:7. http://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/fapi/datastream/unsworks:71288/SOURCE02?view=true

  10. Webster J, Crunkhorn A, Sall J, Highsmith MJ, Pruziner A, Randolph BJ. Clinical practice guidelines for the rehabilitation of lower limb amputation: an update from the Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Defense. AM J Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;98(9):820–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ambler GK, Brookes-Howell L, Jones JAR, Verma N, Bosanquet DC, Thomas-Jones E, Edwards AGK, Twine CP. Development of core outcome sets for people undergoing major lower limb amputation for complications of peripheral vascular Disease. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2020;60(5):730–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sions JM, Beisheim EH, Seth M. Selecting, administering, and interpreting outcome measures among adults with lower-limb loss: an update for clinicians. Curr Phys Med Rehabil Rep. 2020;8(3):92–109.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. “Outcome”. Merriam-Webster Dictonary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/outcome.

  14. Gailey RS, Roach KE, Applegate B, Cho B, Cunniffe B, Licht S, et al. The amputee mobility predictor: an instrument to assess determinants of the lower-limb amputee’s ability to ambulate. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(5):613–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Raya MA, Gailey RS, Scoville C, Gaunaurd I, Ganyard H, Knapp-Wood J, McDonough K, Palmisano T. The amputee mobility predictor-bilateral: a performance based measure of mobility for amputees with bilateral lower limb loss. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(7):961–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gaunaurd IA, Spaulding SE, Amtmann D, Salem R, Gailey RS, Morgan SJ, et al. Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists: results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program. Proc Inst Mech Eng. 2015;39(4):314–21.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Borrenpohl D, Kaluf B, Major MJ. Survey of U.S. practitioners on the validity of the medicare functional classification level system and utility of clinical outcome measures for aiding K-level assignment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;97(7):1053–63.

  18. Clemens SM, Gailey RS, Bennett CL, Kirk-Sanchez NJ, Pasquina PF, Gaunaurd IA. The Component Timed-Up-and-Go test: the utility and psychometric properties of using a mobile application to determine prosthetic mobility in people with lower limb amputations. Clin Rehabil. 2018;32(3):388–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Deathe AB, Miller WC. The L test of functional mobility: measurement properties of a modified version of the timed “up & go” test designed for people with lower-limb amputations. Phys Ther. 2005;85(7):626–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Reid L, Thomson P, Besemann M, Dudek N. Going places: does the two-minute walk test predict the six-minute walk test in lower extremity amputees? J Rehabil Med. 2015;47(3):256–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Carse B, Scott H, Davie-Smith F, Brady L, Colvin J. Minimal clinically important difference in walking velocity, gait profile score, and two mintest for individuals with lower limb amputation. Gait Posture. 2021;88:221–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gaunaurd I, Kristal A, Horn A, Krueger C, Muro O, Rosenberg A, et al. The utility of the 2-minute walk test as a measure of mobility in people with lower limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101(7):1183–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hafner BJ, Gaunaurd IA, Morgan SJ, Amtmann D, Salem R, Gailey RS. Construct validation of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M). Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016;98(2):277–85.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Sawers A, Hafner B. Using clinical balance tests to assess fall risk among established unilateral lower limb prosthesis users: cutoff scores and associated validity indices. PM R. 2020;12(1):16–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wong CK, Chen CC, Blackwell WM, Rahal RT, Benoy SA. Balance ability measured with the Berg Balance Scale: a determinant of fall history in community-dwelling adults with leg amputations. J Rehabil Med. 2015;47(1):80–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Beisheim EH, Arch ES, Horne JR, Sions JM. Performance-based outcome measures are associated with cadence variability during community ambulation among individuals with a transtibial amputation. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2020;44(4):215–24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Resnik L, Borgia M. Reliability of outcome measures for people with lower-limb amputations: distinguishing true change from statistical error. Phys Ther. 2011;91(4):555–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Gailey RS, Scoville C, Gaunaurd IA, Raya MA, Linberg A, Stoneman P, Campbell SM, Roach K. Construct validity of the Comprehensive High-level Activity Mobility Predictor (CHAMP) for Service Members with Traumatic Lower Limb Loss. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(7):919–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Dite W, Temple VA. A clinical test of stepping and change of direction to identify multiple falling older adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(11):1566–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Gailey RS, Gaunaurd IA, Raya MA, Roach K, Linberg A, Campbell SM, Jayne DM, Scoville C. The development and reliability testing of the Comprehensive High-level Activity Mobility Predictor (CHAMP) in service members with traumatic lower limb loss. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(7):905–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sawers A, Kim J, Balkman G, Hafner BJ. Interrater and test-retest reliability of performance-based clinical tests administered to established users of lower limb prostheses. Phys Ther. 2020;7(100):1206–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Schoppen T, Boonstra A, Groothoff J, de Vries J, Goeken L, Eisma W. The timed “up and go” test: reliability and validity in persons with unilateral lower limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(7):825–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gaunaurd IA, Roach KE, Raya MA, Cooper R, Linberg A, Laferrier J, Gailey RS. Factors related to high-level mobility in male servicemembers with traumatic lower-limb loss. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(7):969–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Gailey R, Clemens S, Sorenson J, Kirk-Sanchez N, Gaunaurd I, Raya M, Klute G, Pasquina P. Variables that predict basic prosthetic mobility in people with unilateral lower limb amputation. PM R. 2020;12(2):130–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Gaunaurd IA, Gailey RS, Pasquina P. More than the final score: the development, application, and future research of the Comprehensive High-level Activity Mobility Predictor. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(7):ix–xvi.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. • Gailey R, Gaunaurd I, Raya M, Kirk-Sanchez N, Prieto-Sanchez LM, Roach K. Effectiveness of an Evidence Based-Amputee Rehabilitation (EBAR) program: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther. 2020 May 18;100(5):773-787. This study was the first to use performance-based outcome measures for a prescription-based rehabilitation program for people with lower limb loss and report a significant positive change over time in function.

  37. Powell LE, Myers AM. The Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1995;50A(1):M28-34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Sakakibara BM, Miller WC, Backman CL. Rasch analyses of the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale with individuals 50 years and older with lower-limb amputations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(8):1257–63.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Tsai YJ, Yang YC, Lu FH, Lee PY, Lee IT, Lin SI. Functional Balance and Its Determinants in older people with diabetes. PLoS One. 2016;11(7):e0159339.

  40. Resnick HE, Stansberry KB, Harris TB, Tirivedi M, Smith K, Morgan P, et al. Diabetes, peripheral neuropathy, and old age disability. Muscle Nerve. 2002;25:43–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Menz HB, Lord SR, St George R, Fitzpatrick RC. Walking stability and sensorimotor function in older people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:245–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. “STEADI-Older Adult Fall Prevention”. Centers for disease control and prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/index.html.

  43. Nightingale CJ, Mitchell SN, Butterfield SA. Validation of the timed up and go test for assessing balance variables in adults aged 65 and older. J Aging Phys Act. 2019;27(2):230–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Dite W, Conner H, Curtis H. Clinical identification of multiple fall risk early after unilateral transtibial amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(1):109–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Sawers A, Hafner B. Performance-based balance tests, combined with the number of falls recalled in the past year, predicts the incidence of future falls in established unilateral transtibial prosthesis users. PM R. 2021 May 5.

  46. Wong CK, Chen CC, Benoy SA, Rahal RT, Blackwell WM. Role of balance ability and confidence in prosthetic use for mobility in people with lower-limb loss. J Rehab Res Dev. 2014;51(9):1353–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Major MJ, Fatone S, Roth EJ. Validity and reliability of the Berg Balance Scale for community-dwelling persons with lower-limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94(11):2194–202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Wong CKL, Chen CC, Welsh J. Preliminary assessment of balance with the Berg Balance Scale in adults who have a leg amputation and dwell in the community: Rasch rating scale analysis. Phys Ther. 2013;93(11):1520–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Wilken JM, Roy CW, Shaffer SW, Patzkowski JC, Blank RV, Owens JG, Hsu JR. Physical performance limitations after severe lower extremity trauma in military service members. J Orthop Trauma. 2018;32(4):183–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Moore M, Barker K. The validity and reliabiltiy of the four square step test in different adult populations: a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):187.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Roffman CE, Buchanan J, Allison GT. Locomotor performance during rehabilitation of people with lower limb amputation and prosthetic nonuse 12 months after discharge. Phys Ther. 2016;96:985–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Miller WC, Deathe AB, Speechley M. Psychometric properties of the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale among individuals with a lower-limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(5):656–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. World Health Organization. ICF browser: Chapter 4 mobility [Internet]. Geneva (Switzerland): WHO; 2012 [cited 2010 Feb 2]. http://apps.who.int/classifications/icfbrowser/.

  54. Clemens SM, Kirk-Sanchez NJ, Raya MA, Klute GK, Gaunaurd IA, Gailey RS. The component timed-up-and-go test: the utility and psychometric properties of using mobile application to determine prosthetic mobility in people with lower limb amputations. Clin Rehabilit. 2018;32(3):388–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Butland R, Pang J, Gross E, Woodcock A, Geddes D. Two-, six-, and 12-minute walking tests in respiratory disease. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1982;284(6329):1607.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Shank C, Kristal A, Van Veld R, Applegate B, Gaunaurd I, Gailey R. Variations in two minute walk test performance for people with lower limb amputation in the outpatient clinic and research settings. Prosth Orthot Int (POI-D-21–00112, accepted for publication - 7 13 2021)

  57. Linberg A, Roach K, Campbell S, Stoneman P, Gaunaurd IA, Gomez-Orozco C, Raya MA, Gailey RS. Comparison of six-minute walk test performance between non-amputee active duty soldiers and service members with traumatic lower limb loss. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013;50(7):931–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Middleton A, Fritz SL. Walking Speed: The Functional Vital Sign. J Aging Phys Act. 2015;23(2):314–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Amtmann D, Bamer AM, Kim J, Bocell F, Chung H, Park R, Salem R, Hafner BJ. A comparison of computerized adaptive testing and fixed length short forms for the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M). Prosthet Orthot Int. 2018;42(5):476–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; [Available from: https://www.healthmeasures.net/explore-measurement-systems/promis.

  61. Gallagher P, Franchignoni F, Giordano A, MacLachlan M. Trinity amputation and prosthesis experience scales: a psychometric assessment using classical test theory and rasch analysis. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;89(6):487–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Craik RL. Thirty-Sixth Mary McMillan Lecture: never satistifed. Phys Ther. 2005;85:1224–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Glossary: Comparative Effectivness Research. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. https://www.pcori.org/glossary.

  64. Lurie JD, Morgan TS. Pros and cons of pragmatic clinical trials. J Comp Eff Res. 2013;2(1):53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Luce BR, Kramer JM, Goodman SN, Connor JT, Tunis S, Whicher D, Swartz JS. Rethinking randomized clinical trials for comparative effectiveness research: The need for transformational change. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(3):206–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Horn SD, Gassaway J. Practice-Based Evidence Study Design for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Med Care. 2007;45(10):S50-67.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Blonde L, Khunti K, Harris SB, Meizinger C, Skolnik NS. Interpretation and impact of real-world clinical data for the practicing clinician. Adv Ther. 2018;35(11):1763–74.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Bowrin K, Briere J-B, Levy P, Millier A, Clay E, Toumi M. Cost-effectiveness analysis using real-world data: an overview of the literature. J Med Econ. 2019;22(6):545–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, 5915 Ponce de Leon Blvd. 5th Floor Plumer Building, Coral Gables, FL, 33146, USA

    Robert S. Gailey, Neva Kirk-Sanchez & Ignacio Gaunaurd

  2. Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation, Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Robert S. Gailey & Allison Symsack

  3. Department of Physical Therapy, Florida International University, Nicole Wertheim College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Miami, FL, USA

    Sheila Clemens

  4. The Geneva Foundation, Seattle, WA, USA

    Allison Symsack

  5. Department of Rehabilitation, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Allison Symsack

  6. Bruce W. Carter Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Miami, FL, USA

    Ignacio Gaunaurd

Authors
  1. Robert S. Gailey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neva Kirk-Sanchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sheila Clemens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Allison Symsack
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ignacio Gaunaurd
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert S. Gailey.

Ethics declarations

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Amputation Rehabilitation

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gailey, R.S., Kirk-Sanchez, N., Clemens, S. et al. Evidence-Based Amputee Rehabilitation: a Systematic Approach to the Restoration of Function in People with Lower Limb Loss. Curr Phys Med Rehabil Rep 10, 17–26 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40141-021-00335-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40141-021-00335-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation