Gender Differences in Prosthesis-related Outcomes Among Veterans: Results of a National Survey of U.S. Veterans

Overview

Journal PM R

Publisher Wiley

Specialties Emergency Medicine
Rehabilitation Medicine

Date 2023 Jun 21

PMID 37343123

Authors

Patty B Kuo

Keren Lehavot

Rachel M Thomas

Krista Dashtestani

Alexander C Peterson

Anna M Korpak

Aaron P Turner

Rhonda M Williams

Joseph M Czerniecki

Daniel C Norvell

Alyson J Littman

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Women with lower extremity amputations (LEAs) tend to have poorer prosthesis-related outcomes than men, although the literature is sparse. To our knowledge, there are no prior studies examining prosthesis-related outcomes of women veterans with LEAs.

Objective: To examine gender differences (overall and by type of amputation) among veterans who underwent LEAs between 2005 and 2018, received care at the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) prior to undergoing amputation, and were prescribed a prosthesis. It was hypothesized that compared to men, women would report lower satisfaction with prosthetic services, poorer prosthesis fit, lower prosthesis satisfaction, less prosthesis use, and worse self-reported mobility. Furthermore, it was hypothesized that gender differences in outcomes would be more pronounced among individuals with transfemoral than among those with transtibial amputations.

Design: Cross-sectional survey. Linear regressions were used to assess overall gender differences in outcomes and gender differences based on type of amputation in a national sample of veterans.

Setting: VHA medical centers.

Participants: The sample consisted of 449 veterans who self-identified their gender (women = 165, men = 284) with transtibial (n = 236), transfemoral (n = 135), and bilateral LEAs (n = 68) including all amputation etiologies.

Interventions: Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures: The Orthotics and Prosthetics User's Survey, Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experiences Scale, and Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility-Short Form were used to assess satisfaction with prosthetic services, prosthesis fit, prosthesis satisfaction, prosthesis use, and self-reported mobility.

Results: Women had poorer self-reported mobility than men (d = -0.26, 95% confidence interval -0.49 to -0.02, p < .05); this difference was small. There were no statistically significant gender differences in satisfaction with prosthetic services, prosthesis fit, prosthesis satisfaction, daily hours of prosthesis use, or by amputation type.

Conclusions: Contrary to the hypothesis, prosthesis-related outcomes were similar between men and women with LEAs. Minimal differences may in part be due to receiving care from the VHA's integrated Amputation System of Care.

Citing Articles

Satisfaction With Department of Veterans Affairs Prosthetics and Support Services as Reported by Women and Men Veterans.

Leonard C, Kenney R, Silvasstar J, Bull S, Ho M, Campbell E Fed Pract. 2025; 41(11):358-364.

PMID: 39839701 PMC: 11745374. DOI: 10.12788/fp.0526.

References

Webster J, Scholten J, Young P, Randolph B . Ten-Year Outcomes of a Systems-Based Approach to Longitudinal Amputation Care in the US Department of Veteran Affairs. Fed Pract. 2020; 37(8):360-367. PMC: 7473733. DOI: 10.12788/fp.0024. View

Gailey R, McFarland L, Cooper R, Czerniecki J, Gambel J, Hubbard S . Unilateral lower-limb loss: prosthetic device use and functional outcomes in servicemembers from Vietnam war and OIF/OEF conflicts. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010; 47(4):317-31. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2009.04.0039. View

Davies B, Datta D . Mobility outcome following unilateral lower limb amputation. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2004; 27(3):186-90. DOI: 10.1080/03093640308726681. View

Lefebvre K, Chevan J . Sex disparities in level of amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010; 92(1):118-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.10.005. View

Hisano G, Hashizume S, Kobayashi Y, Murai A, Kobayashi T, Nakashima M . Factors associated with a risk of prosthetic knee buckling during walking in unilateral transfemoral amputees. Gait Posture. 2020; 77:69-74. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.01.002. View

Hall K, Beckham J, Bosworth H, Sloane R, Pieper C, Morey M . PTSD is negatively associated with physical performance and physical function in older overweight military Veterans. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014; 51(2):285-95. PMC: 4062919. DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2013.04.0091. View

Elnitsky C, Latlief G, Andrews E, Adams-Koss L, Phillips S . Preferences for rehabilitation services among women with major limb amputations. Rehabil Nurs. 2013; 38(1):32-6. DOI: 10.1002/rnj.62. View

Heinemann A, Bode R, OReilly C . Development and measurement properties of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS): a comprehensive set of clinical outcome instruments. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2004; 27(3):191-206. DOI: 10.1080/03093640308726682. View

Randolph B, Nelson L, Highsmith M . A Review of Unique Considerations for Female Veterans With Amputation. Mil Med. 2016; 181(S4):66-68. DOI: 10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00262. View

10.

Kimerling R, Gima K, Smith M, Street A, Frayne S . The Veterans Health Administration and military sexual trauma. Am J Public Health. 2007; 97(12):2160-6. PMC: 2089100. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2006.092999. View

11.

Frlan-Vrgoc L, Vrbanic T, Kraguljac D, Kovacevic M . Functional outcome assessment of lower limb amputees and prosthetic users with a 2-minute walk test. Coll Antropol. 2012; 35(4):1215-8. View

12.

Webster J . Lower Limb Amputation Care Across the Active Duty Military and Veteran Populations. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2018; 30(1):89-109. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmr.2018.08.008. View

13.

Magnusson L, Ramstrand N, Fransson E, Ahlstrom G . Mobility and satisfaction with lower-limb prostheses and orthoses among users in Sierra Leone: a cross-sectional study. J Rehabil Med. 2014; 46(5):438-46. DOI: 10.2340/16501977-1780. View

14.

Kark L, Simmons A . Patient satisfaction following lower-limb amputation: the role of gait deviation. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2011; 35(2):225-33. DOI: 10.1177/0309364611406169. View

15.

Webster J, Crunkhorn A, Sall J, Highsmith M, Pruziner A, Randolph B . 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):820-829. DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000001213. View

16.

Saglam Y, Gulenc B, Birisik F, Ersen A, Yalcinkaya E, Yazicioglu O . The quality of life analysis of knee prosthesis with complete microprocessor control in trans-femoral amputees. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2017; 51(6):466-469. PMC: 6197582. DOI: 10.1016/j.aott.2017.10.009. View

17.

Katon J, Reiber G . Major traumatic limb loss among women veterans and servicemembers. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013; 50(2):173-82. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2012.01.0007. View

18.

Washington D, Bean-Mayberry B, Riopelle D, Yano E . Access to care for women veterans: delayed healthcare and unmet need. J Gen Intern Med. 2011; 26 Suppl 2:655-61. PMC: 3191223. DOI: 10.1007/s11606-011-1772-z. View

19.

Baars E, Schrier E, Dijkstra P, Geertzen J . Prosthesis satisfaction in lower limb amputees: A systematic review of associated factors and questionnaires. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97(39):e12296. PMC: 6181602. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012296. View

20.

Burcak B, Kesikburun B, Koseoglu B, Oken O, Dogan A . Quality of life, body image, and mobility in lower-limb amputees using high-tech prostheses: A pragmatic trial. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2020; 64(1):101405. DOI: 10.1016/j.rehab.2020.03.016. View