Biomedical and psychosocial factors influencing transtibial prosthesis fit: a Delphi survey among health care professionals

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to reach consensus among professionals caring for prosthesis users, on definitions of biomedical and psychosocial factors, to assess their influence on fit of transtibial prosthesis and to identify new factors. Method: A three-round, internet-based, Delphi survey was conducted among experts recruited via the Dutch National Amputee and Prosthesis Work Group. The main outcome measure was consensus among care professionals on statements concerning new and presented biomechanical and psychosocial factors that influence transtibial prosthesis fit. Results: Fifty-four experts participated in the survey, and consensus was reached on 67% (46/69) of all statements. Consensus on statements relevant for good prosthesis fit was reached in most of the statements concerning psychosocial factors and on statements concerning the biomedical factors “prosthesis support and suspension”. Least consensus was reached on statements concerning the biomedical factor “skin problems and pain in the residual limb”. Conclusions: Biomedical and psychosocial factors influence transtibial prosthesis fit. Consensus was reached among care professionals in a majority of the presented statements concerning these factors.

Implications for Rehabilitation

• Prosthesis fit and comfort is suboptimal in many prosthesis users. Both biomedical and psychosocial factors influence fit.

• Biomedical and psychosocial factors should be checked during transtibial prosthesis prescription to achieve and maintain an optimal fit.

• Consensus on many factors influencing prosthesis fit is achieved among care professionals. Consensus was largest regarding prosthesis support and suspension and least regarding skin problems and pain in the residual limb. This consensus contributes to systematic assessment of prosthesis fit.

• Amputee care
• biomedical factors
• prosthesis fit
• psychosocial factors

Declaration of interest

There is no conflict of interest regarding this manuscript.

Financial support was provided by OIM orthopaedics, Groningen, the Netherlands.

Financial benefits to authors: the authors received no financial benefits in relation to this study.

The material in our study has not been previously published or presented.