926
Views
3
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Research

Perceived self-efficacy and specific self-reported outcomes in persons with lower-limb amputation using a non-microprocessor-controlled versus a microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee

, , &
Pages 220-225 | Received 15 Nov 2016, Accepted 10 Mar 2017, Published online: 01 Apr 2017
 

Abstract

Purpose: To measure self-efficacy in a group of individuals who have undergone a lower-limb amputation and investigate the relationship between self-efficacy and prosthetic-specific outcomes including prosthetic use, mobility, amputation-related problems and global health. A second purpose was to examine if differences exist in outcomes based upon the type of prosthetic knee unit being used.

Method: Cross-sectional study using the General Self-Efficacy (GSE) Scale and the Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (Q-TFA). Forty-two individuals participated in the study. Twenty-three used a non-microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee joint (non-MPK) and 19 used a microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee joint (MPK).

Results: The study sample had quite high GSE scores (32/40). GSE scores were significantly correlated to the Q-TFA prosthetic use, mobility and problem scores. High GSE scores were related to higher levels of prosthetic use, mobility, global scores and negatively related to problem score. No significant difference was observed between individuals using a non-MPK versus MPK joints.

Conclusions: Individuals with high self-efficacy used their prosthesis to a higher degree and high self-efficacy was related to higher level of mobility, global scores and fewer problems related to the amputation in individuals who have undergone a lower-limb amputation and were using a non-MPK or MPK knee.

    Implications for rehabilitation

  • Perceived self-efficacy has has been shown to be related to quality of life, prosthetic mobility and capability as well as social activities in daily life.

  • Prosthetic rehabilitation is primary focusing on physical improvement rather than psychological interventions.

  • More attention should be directed towards the relationship between self-efficacy and prosthetic related outcomes during prosthetic rehabilitation after a lower-limb amputation.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge assistance of Björn Börsbo, David Rusaw and Ingvar Kåreholt.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Additional information

Funding

This research was funded in part by Össur and TeamOlmed.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.