IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0234342.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

User-relevant factors determining prosthesis choice in persons with major unilateral upper limb defects: A meta-synthesis of qualitative literature and focus group results

Author

Listed:
  • Nienke Kerver
  • Sacha van Twillert
  • Bart Maas
  • Corry K van der Sluis

Abstract

Objective: Considering the high rejection rates of upper limb prostheses, it is important to determine which prosthesis fits best the needs of each user. The introduction of the multi-grip prostheses hands (MHP), which have functional advantages but are also more expensive, has made prosthesis selection even harder. Therefore, we aimed to identify user opinions on factors determining prosthesis choice of persons with major unilateral upper limb defects in order to facilitate a more optimal fit between user and prosthesis. Methods: A qualitative meta-synthesis using a ‘best-fit framework’ approach was performed by searching five databases (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019126973). Studies were considered eligible if they contained qualitative content about adults with major unilateral upper limb defects experienced in using commercially available upper limb prostheses and focused on upper limb prosthesis users’ opinions. Results of the meta-synthesis were validated with end-users (n = 11) in a focus group. Results: Out of 6247 articles, 19 studies were included. An overview of six main themes (‘physical’, ‘activities and participation’, ‘mental’, ‘social’, ‘rehabilitation, cost and prosthetist services’ and ‘prosthesis related factors’) containing 86 subthemes that could affect prosthesis choice was created. Of these subthemes, 19 were added by the focus group. Important subthemes were ‘work/school’, ‘functionality’ and ‘reactions from public’. Opinions of MHP-users were scarce. MHPs were experienced as more dexterous and life-like but also as less robust and difficult to control. Conclusion: The huge number of factors that could determine upper limb prosthesis choice explains that preferences vary greatly. The created overview can be of great value to identify preferences and facilitate user-involvement in the selection process. Ultimately, this may contribute to a more successful match between user and prosthesis, resulting in a decrease of abandonment and increase of cost-effectiveness.

Suggested Citation

  • Nienke Kerver & Sacha van Twillert & Bart Maas & Corry K van der Sluis, 2020. "User-relevant factors determining prosthesis choice in persons with major unilateral upper limb defects: A meta-synthesis of qualitative literature and focus group results," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-25, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234342
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0234342
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234342
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0234342&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0234342?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0234342. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.