1 / 5

Self-reported and performance-based outcomes using DEKA Arm

Self-reported and performance-based outcomes using DEKA Arm. Linda Resnik, PT, PhD; Matthew Borgia, MS; Gail Latlief, DO; Nicole Sasson, MD; Lisa Smurr-Walters, MS, OTR/L, CHT. Aim

marieedwards
Download Presentation

Self-reported and performance-based outcomes using DEKA Arm

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Self-reported and performance-based outcomes using DEKA Arm Linda Resnik, PT, PhD; Matthew Borgia, MS; Gail Latlief, DO; Nicole Sasson, MD; Lisa Smurr-Walters, MS, OTR/L, CHT

  2. Aim • Quantify outcomes including dexterity, performance of daily activities, and prosthetic skill and spontaneity of DEKA Arm users. • Compare outcomes when using DEKA Arm versus existing prosthesis. • Relevance • Mechanical properties of DEKA Arm and associated engineering innovations are easy to observe. • What is less clear is how these advances translate into functional benefits for user with amputation.

  3. Method • Quasi-experimental study. • Examined descriptive analyses outcomes by DEKA Arm configuration level. • 32 subjects were trained in use and completed end-of-study testing with DEKA Arm. • Data from 26 prosthetic users were used to compare outcomes using existing prostheses versus DEKA Arm.

  4. Results • Dexterity and activity performance with DEKA Arm: • Varied by amputation level. • Self-reported function and number of activities performed using prosthesis: • Similar across levels. • Comparisons with existing prostheses showed effect on dexterity based on level.

  5. Conclusion • Activity performance and spontaneity of prosthetic use improved for users of shoulder configuration level. • Use of prosthesis to perform activities and perceived difficulty performing self-selected tasks improved for all levels.

More Related