Consumer Satisfaction with the Services of Prosthetics and Orthotics Facilities

Bosmans, Joline; Geertzen, Joannes; Dijkstra, Pieter U.

doi:10.1080/03093640802403803

Cited by 31 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For this study we used a questionnaire composed out of four existing and validated questionnaires [13,[20][21][22]:…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bosman et al [13] observed that service provision and delivery by the orthotic service provider are also important satisfaction elements in the process. One would expect that patients who report a high satisfaction use their device without serious problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The survey by Jannink is a questionnaire for usability evaluation of orthopaedic shoes [13]. It distinguishes four effectiveness items, one efficiency item and seven satisfaction items.…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Use of and Satisfaction with Ankle Foot Orthoses

EJM¹

2015

Clin Res Foot Ankle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study was to obtain insight in specific elements influencing the use, non-use, satisfaction, and dissatisfaction of ankle foot orthoses (AFOs) and the presence of underexposed problems with respect to AFOs. Methods:A questionnaire was composed to obtain information from AFO users to investigate the variables associated with satisfaction and the relation between these variables. A specific feature of this study was the systematic analysis of the remarks made by the respondents about their AFO. Quantitative data analyses were used for analysing the satisfaction and qualitative analyses were used analysing the remarks of the respondents. A total of 211 users completed the questionnaire.Results: Our survey showed that 1 out of 15 AFOs were not used at all. About three quarters of the AFO users were satisfied and about one quarter was dissatisfied. Females and users living alone reported relatively high levels of dissatisfaction, especially in the field of dimensions, comfort, weight, safety and effectiveness. Dissatisfaction with respect to off-the-shelf AFOs for the item durability was higher than that for custom-made AFOs. In the delivery and maintenance process the items 'maintenance', 'professionalism' and 'delivery follow-up' were judged to be unsatisfactory. A large number of comments were made by the respondents to improve the device or process, mainly by the satisfied AFO users. These comments show that even satisfied users experience many problems and that a lot of problems of AFO users are 'underexposed'. Conclusion:To improve user satisfaction, the user practice has to be identified as an important sub-process of the whole orthopaedic chain especially in the diagnosis and prescription, delivery tuning and maintenance, and evaluation phase.

show abstract

“…For this study we used a questionnaire composed out of four existing and validated questionnaires [13,[20][21][22]:…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Use of and Satisfaction with Ankle Foot Orthoses

EJM¹

2015

Clin Res Foot Ankle

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The satisfaction items on the SRS-22 were scored using 5-point ordinal scales that range from 1 to 5 (i.e., "very unsatisfied" to "very satisfied" and "definitely not" to "definitely yes"). 29 In 2009, Bosmans et al 40 published a follow-up study to that reported by Geertzen et al 17 The authors again evaluated consumer satisfaction with services provided by O&P facilities in The Netherlands using a modified SERVQUAL questionnaire. To evaluate satisfaction with these devices, the authors used the aforementioned D-QUEST outcome measure.…”

Section: Jpo Journal Of Prosthetics and Orthoticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Satisfaction With Orthotic Devices and Services: A Systematic Literature Review

Peaco

Halsne

Hafner

2011

JPO Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient satisfaction is an abstract and multidimensional concept that is recognized to be an important component of evidence-based health care. Although there have been increased attempts to develop and use standardized, patientreported outcome (PRO) measures for the evaluation of satisfaction with rehabilitation services, analogous efforts in orthotics and prosthetics (O&P) are less common. Measuring satisfaction in O&P may be challenging because patients' satisfaction is derived from their experiences with both the services and the devices provided. Similarly, patients' experiences with orthoses may differ from prostheses, because their motivations for use may be different. The purpose of this literature review is to identify and appraise PRO instruments that have been used to assess satisfaction with orthotic devices and services. A secondary purpose is to advocate for measures that are suitable for an O&P clinical environment. A systematic search of medical databases was conducted using a combination of the terms "satisfaction" and "orthotic" (and related synonyms, such as "orthosis" and "orthoses"). Publications were selected for review if they identified instruments that were administered with a clear and standardized protocol by an orthotist or a pedorthist to patients or participants with a diagnosis indicating orthotic intervention. The reviewed measures were classified as either formal (i.e., had an established history of psychometric development) or ad hoc (i.e., had not undergone formal psychometric testing of any kind). For each reviewed measure, the subdomains (i.e., determining factors of satisfaction) were identified through a review of the measure's items and the body of the associated publication(s). Fourteen publications met the selection criteria and were chosen for review. Publications dates ranged from 1989 to 2009, and studies included a variety of orthotic devices (e.g., ankle-foot orthoses, knee-ankle-foot orthoses, cranial helmets, spinal, etc.). Seven ad hoc and four formal PRO instruments were identified in the review. Formal measures included the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS), the modified SERVQUAL instrument, the Quebec Users' Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology 2.0, and the Scoliosis Research Society 22/24 questionnaire. Seventeen subdomains of satisfaction were identified within the reviewed outcome measures. Eight subdomains pertained to device satisfaction (e.g., cosmesis or comfort), eight subdomains contributed to satisfaction with services (e.g., competence or communication), and one (i.e., overall satisfaction) was applicable to both device and service domains. The OPUS and SERVQUAL were identified as measures that may be well suited to the assessment of orthotic services (SERQUAL and OPUS) and devices (OPUS) in a clinical environment. Future research is recommended to focus on the use of standardized measures of satisfaction and dissemination of experiences with these instruments. (J Prosthet Orthot. 2011;23:95-105.)

show abstract

“…Therefore, greater involvement of patients in the device prescription process and establishment of a client-centered approach should enhance their compliance with treatment regimens (Karmarkar et al, 2009). Some outcome measures for assessment of patients' satisfaction with their orthosis are available (Demers et al, 2002b;Heinemann et al, 2003;Bosmans et al, 2009). The majority of them have been developed in English and -to the best of our knowledge -no validated Arabic versions exist, even though there is an increasing need for them as different cultures vary in their perception of dysfunction and in their healthcare systems (Beaton et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translation into Arabic of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology 2.0 and validation in orthosis users

Bakhsh¹,

Franchignoni²,

Ferriero³

et al. 2014

International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The assessment of patient satisfaction with the orthosis is a key point for clinical practice and research, requiring the availability of questionnaires with robust psychometric properties. The aim of this study was the translation into Arabic and Rasch validation of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (A-QUEST 2.0), one of the few standardized instruments appropriate for assessment of patient satisfaction with the orthosis. The translation was carried out in accordance with guideline recommendations. The translated version was administered to a convenience sample of 100 individuals with various health conditions using orthosis (59% men, mean age 36 years). Data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis, followed by Rasch analysis for each of the two subscales, that is satisfaction with the Device (eight items) and with Services (four items). The results of the confirmatory factor analysis verified the bidimensionality of A-QUEST 2.0. Rasch criteria for the functioning of rating scale categories were fulfilled for both subscales. All items except one showed an adequate fit to the Rasch model. The person separation reliability for A-QUEST 2.0_Device was 2.19 and Cronbach's α 0.83; A-QUEST 2.0_Services separation reliability was 2.79 and Cronbach's α was 0.89. Thus, the two subscales could define a hierarchy of persons along each measured construct with at least three different levels of satisfaction. This Rasch validation of A-QUEST 2.0, in patients with various types of orthoses, provides additional evidence of the psychometric properties (and particularly the internal construct validity) of the questionnaire, and provides insights for further improving its metric quality.

show abstract

Consumer Satisfaction with the Services of Prosthetics and Orthotics Facilities

Cited by 31 publications

References 18 publications

Use of and Satisfaction with Ankle Foot Orthoses

Use of and Satisfaction with Ankle Foot Orthoses

Assessing Satisfaction With Orthotic Devices and Services: A Systematic Literature Review

Translation into Arabic of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology 2.0 and validation in orthosis users

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About