Prosthesis Usability Experience is Associated with Extent of Upper Limb Prosthesis Adoption: A Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) Analysis

Overview

Journal PLoS One

Specialties General Medicine
Science

Date 2024 Jun 25

PMID 38917074

Authors

Linda J Resnik

Matthew Borgia

Emily L Graczyk

Jessica Barth

Pengsheng Ni

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Factors associated with upper limb prosthesis adoption are not well understood. In this study, we explored how prosthesis usability experience relates to the extent of prosthesis adoption through the development of a structural equation model (SEM). First, items related to prosthesis usability were developed and refined using cognitive testing and pilot testing and employed in a survey of 402 prosthesis users (mean age 61.7 (sd 14.4), 77.1% Veterans). The SEM examined two unidimensional latent constructs: Prosthesis Usability Experience and Prosthesis Adoption-and each had multiple measured indicators. SEMs tested direct as well as moderating and mediating effects between the latent constructs and covariates related to demographics and prosthesis type. SEM found a significant positive association between Prosthesis Usability Experience and Extent of Prosthesis Adoption. Several covariates had direct effects on prosthesis adoption: 1) Extent of Prosthesis Adoption was lower for those with transhumeral and shoulder amputation, and higher for those with bilateral amputation, compared to the reference group with unilateral transradial amputation and 2) Myoelectric multiple degree of freedom (multi-DOF) prosthesis use was associated with lower Extent of Prosthesis Adoption, compared to body-powered prosthesis use. Myoelectric multi-DOF use also modified the effect of Prosthesis Usability Experience on Extent of Prosthesis Adoption. For those with bilateral ULA, the strength of the relationship between Prosthesis Usability Experience and Extent of Prosthesis Adoption was reduced. Findings suggest that in order to increase prosthesis adoption, prosthetics developers and rehabilitation providers should focus on implementing strategies to improve prosthesis usability experience. New Prosthesis Usability Experience measures could be used to identify persons at greater risk for poor prosthesis adoption and target interventions to increase prosthesis use.

References

Dai B, Ware W, Giuliani C . A structural equation model relating physical function, pain, impaired mobility (IM), and falls in older adults. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2012; 55(3):645-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.archger.2012.06.005. View

Raichle K, Hanley M, Molton I, Kadel N, Campbell K, Phelps E . Prosthesis use in persons with lower- and upper-limb amputation. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2009; 45(7):961-72. PMC: 2743731. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2007.09.0151. View

Peek M . Structural equation modeling and rehabilitation research. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2000; 79(3):301-9. DOI: 10.1097/00002060-200005000-00014. View

Frey S, Motawar B, Buchanan K, Kaufman C, Stevens P, Cirstea C . Greater and More Natural Use of the Upper Limbs During Everyday Life by Former Amputees Versus Prosthesis Users. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2022; 36(3):227-238. DOI: 10.1177/15459683211062889. View

Jobe J, Mingay D . Cognitive research improves questionnaires. Am J Public Health. 1989; 79(8):1053-5. PMC: 1349911. DOI: 10.2105/ajph.79.8.1053. View

Schauberger G, Mair P . A regularization approach for the detection of differential item functioning in generalized partial credit models. Behav Res Methods. 2019; 52(1):279-294. DOI: 10.3758/s13428-019-01224-2. View

Hollingsworth H, Gray D . Structural equation modeling of the relationships between participation in leisure activities and community environments by people with mobility impairments. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010; 91(8):1174-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.04.019. View

Ostlie K, Lesjo I, Franklin R, Garfelt B, Skjeldal O, Magnus P . Prosthesis rejection in acquired major upper-limb amputees: a population-based survey. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2011; 7(4):294-303. DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2011.635405. View

McFarland L, Hubbard Winkler S, Heinemann A, Jones M, Esquenazi A . Unilateral upper-limb loss: satisfaction and prosthetic-device use in veterans and servicemembers from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010; 47(4):299-316. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2009.03.0027. View

10.

Wright T, Hagen A, Wood M . Prosthetic usage in major upper extremity amputations. J Hand Surg Am. 1995; 20(4):619-22. DOI: 10.1016/S0363-5023(05)80278-3. View

11.

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

12.

Pezzin L, Dillingham T, MacKenzie E, Ephraim P, Rossbach P . Use and satisfaction with prosthetic limb devices and related services. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004; 85(5):723-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.06.002. View

13.

Resnik L, Borgia M, Clark M, Ni P . Out-of-pocket costs and affordability of upper limb prostheses. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2023; 48(1):108-114. DOI: 10.1097/PXR.0000000000000223. View

14.

Preacher K, Rucker D, Hayes A . Addressing Moderated Mediation Hypotheses: Theory, Methods, and Prescriptions. Multivariate Behav Res. 2016; 42(1):185-227. DOI: 10.1080/00273170701341316. View

15.

Ostlie K, Lesjo I, Franklin R, Garfelt B, Skjeldal O, Magnus P . Prosthesis use in adult acquired major upper-limb amputees: patterns of wear, prosthetic skills and the actual use of prostheses in activities of daily life. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2012; 7(6):479-93. DOI: 10.3109/17483107.2011.653296. View

16.

McKenna S, Heaney A . Composite outcome measurement in clinical research: the triumph of illusion over reality?. J Med Econ. 2020; 23(10):1196-1204. DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2020.1797755. View

17.

Berke G, Fergason J, Milani J, Hattingh J, McDowell M, Nguyen V . Comparison of satisfaction with current prosthetic care in veterans and servicemembers from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts with major traumatic limb loss. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010; 47(4):361-71. DOI: 10.1682/jrrd.2009.12.0193. View

18.

Resnik L, Borgia M, Clark M, Ni P . Measuring residual limb health in persons with upper limb amputation: Modifications of the Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire residual limb health scale. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2023; 47(5):544-551. DOI: 10.1097/PXR.0000000000000227. View

19.

van Lunteren A, Stassen H, Zuithoff M . A field evaluation of arm prostheses for unilateral amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1983; 7(3):141-51. DOI: 10.3109/03093648309166586. View

20.

Magasi S, Wong A, Miskovic A, Tulsky D, Heinemann A . Mobility Device Quality Affects Participation Outcomes for People With Disabilities: A Structural Equation Modeling Analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017; 99(1):1-8. DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.06.030. View