No abstract

This pilot study aimed to investigate the implementation of supervised classifiers and a neural network for the recognition of activities carried out by Individuals with Lower Limb Amputation (ILLAs), as well as individuals without gait impairment, in free living conditions. Eight individuals with no gait impairments and four ILLAs wore a thigh-based accelerometer and walked on an improvised route in the vicinity of their homes across a variety of terrains. Various machine learning classifiers were trained and tested for recognition of walking activities. Additional investigations were made regarding the detail of the activity label versus classifier accuracy and whether the classifiers were capable of being trained exclusively on non-impaired individuals’ data and could recognize physical activities carried out by ILLAs. At a basic level of label detail, Support Vector Machines (SVM) and Long-Short Term Memory (LSTM) networks were able to acquire 77–78% mean classification accuracy, which fell with increased label detail. Classifiers trained on individuals without gait impairment could not recognize activities carried out by ILLAs. This investigation presents the groundwork for a HAR system capable of recognizing a variety of walking activities, both for individuals with no gait impairments and ILLAs.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Interventions which have focused on improving the physical activity of individuals with lower limb amputation can be mostly categorized into behavioural-based and prosthetic-based interventions. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of these interventions, and to identify the key gaps in research in this field. METHODOLOGY: The databases of Scopus, Pubmed, Embase, Medline and Web of Science were searched between September and December of 2019 for articles relating to physical activity, amputees and interventions. Articles were assessed quantitively based on internal validity, external validity and intervention intensity.   FINDINGS: Sixteen articles (5 behavioural, 11 prosthetic) were assessed. Both approaches had comparable methodological quality and mixed efficacy for producing a significant change in physical activity outcomes. Almost all interventions used a simplistic measurement of activity as their outcome. CONCLUSIONS: There is an insufficient amount of studies to assess the overall efficacy of behavioural interventions in regard to how they impact on physical activity behaviour. However, the increase of quality of the methodology in the more recent studies could indicate that future interventions will retain similar levels of quality. Prosthetic interventions have shown no major improvement in efficacy compared to similar reviews and may need to utilise more advanced prosthetic components to attain significant changes in physical activity. Activity outcomes should expand into more complex activity measurements to properly understand the physical activity profile of people with lower limb amputation. Layman’s Abstract: The purpose of this review was to identify original research which tried to improve the physical activity behaviours of individuals with lower extremity amputation. Through multiple databases, the review article identified a mixture of 5 behavioural and 11 prosthetic-based interventions which aligned with the search criteria of the review. The behavioural-based interventions used behavioural change techniques controlled by healthcare professionals to try and promote a change in physical activity behaviours. The prosthetic-based interventions employed a prosthetic component, with the intention being that if the prosthetic component had superior design, the individual would feel more encouraged to be physically active. This review article concludes that, prosthetic interventions do not appear to have a consistent significant impact on the physical activity behaviours, and though behavioural interventions also had mixed efficacy, there were not enough interventions of their design to make a conclusive statement.     Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/33931/26330 How To Cite: Jamieson A.G., Murray L., Buis A. The use of physical activity outcomes in rehabilitation interventions for lower limb amputees: A systematic review. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2020;Volume3, Issue1, No.2. https://doi.org/ 10.33137/cpoj.v3i1.33931 Corresponding Author: Dr. Arjan Buis,Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Strathclyde, Wolfson Centre, 106 Rottenrow, Glasgow, G4 0NW, Scotland, UK.E-Mail: arjan.buis@strath.ac.ukORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3947-293X

3921 adults randomly selected from across Great Britain were interviewed. Subjects were asked to assess a selection of 10 out of 200 vignettes. Each vignette contained four elements: a category of individual; access to some or all of the health record; specified purpose; and level of patient identifier. Subjects were asked to say how happy they would be to allow access to their health record in the circumstances described.The public were generally happy to provide access to health information. For almost a third of vignettes, subjects said that they would be very happy to allow access to their health information. 9.1% of subjects said that they would be very happy to allow access within all of the vignettes that they were asked to assess. There was however, a significant minority of responses (11.6%) to vignettes where subjects said that they would be very unhappy to allow access. In addition 2.1% of individuals said that they were very unhappy with all of the vignettes presented to them. Individuals from higher social groups, older people and males were more likely to be happy with access to their health information. The individual requesting information was the most important factor determining permission to access health information. Subjects were happier to release anonymised rather than personally identifiable data. Content of the information to be released did not seem to be that important, even when the health record contained sensitive information. With the exception of teaching students, the use of the information wasn't an important determinant of consent.Despite a level of support for use of health information in most circumstances, this doesn't mean that patients don't want to be asked for consent, nor that the views of the small minority can be ignored. The ethical and policy implications of these findings will be discussed.