Pilot randomized trial of a telephone-delivered physical activity and weight management intervention for individuals with lower extremity amputation

Littman, Alyson J.; Haselkorn, Jodie K.; Arterburn, David

doi:10.1016/j.dhjo.2018.08.002

Cited by 16 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… Pain level decreased, HRQOL increased, and no change occurred in ambulatory activity level. Littman (2018) [ 81 ] Pilot randomized trial of a telephone-delivered physical activity and weight management intervention for individuals with lower extremity amputation 15 participants (12 BK, 3 AK) StepWatch (Not provided) Steps (7 days) Test the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of a weight management and physical activity intervention and obtain preliminary efficacy estimates for changes in weight, body composition, and physical functioning. Coached participants had greater decreases in waist circumference and fat mass, but no significant intervention effects were observed for physical functioning or physical activity.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell

Diment

Micó-Amigo

et al. 2020

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Understanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper-and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring, with particular focus on low-resource settings. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis users during daily-living. Results: Sixty lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lowerlimb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm. Conclusions: Activity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user's requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The lifestyle interventions for lower-limb prosthesis users were aimed at promoting physical activity [ 67 , 69 , 81 ], providing rehabilitation [ 86 ] or providing massage [ 80 ]. These all showed positive outcomes, from increased daily step counts [ 67 ] to weight loss [ 81 ] and decreased pain levels [ 100 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell

Diment

Micó-Amigo

et al. 2020

J NeuroEngineering Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Both wheelchair users and professionals confirmed this starting point by mentioning intrinsic motivation as a key determinant of healthy dietary behaviour. Motivational interviewing has already been successfully used in lifestyle interventions aimed at increasing physical activity and reducing weight in people with SCI or LLA [52,53]. Motivational interviewing can be used well in blended use of the mobile lifestyle app to be developed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of dietary behaviour in wheelchair users with spinal cord injury or lower limb amputation: Perspectives of rehabilitation professionals and wheelchair users

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Only one intervention study was identified from the set of upper-limb studies and this used a log of grasping events to explore the effect of sensory feedback on use over time. 71 The lifestyle interventions for lower-limb prosthesis users were aimed at promoting physical activity, 67,69,81 providing rehabilitation 86 or providing massage. 80 These all showed positive outcomes, from increased daily step counts 67 to weight loss 81 and decreased pain levels.…”

Section: Figure 1 Flow Chart Of Selection and Sorting Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…71 The lifestyle interventions for lower-limb prosthesis users were aimed at promoting physical activity, 67,69,81 providing rehabilitation 86 or providing massage. 80 These all showed positive outcomes, from increased daily step counts 67 to weight loss 81 and decreased pain levels. 101 Of the 17 papers that compared activity levels of lower-limb prosthesis users to clinical scores, most compared the recorded physical activity to the K-level scores and found good correlation.…”

Section: Figure 1 Flow Chart Of Selection and Sorting Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Chadwell¹,

Diment²,

Amigo³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundUnderstanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper- and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis-users during daily-living.Results60 lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lower-limb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm.ConclusionsActivity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user’s requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.

show abstract

Pilot randomized trial of a telephone-delivered physical activity and weight management intervention for individuals with lower extremity amputation

Cited by 16 publications

References 41 publications

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Determinants of dietary behaviour in wheelchair users with spinal cord injury or lower limb amputation: Perspectives of rehabilitation professionals and wheelchair users

Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About