3.9 Review

Residual limb volume change: Systematic review of measurement and management

Journal

Publisher

JOURNAL REHAB RES & DEV
DOI: 10.1682/JRRD.2010.09.0189

Keywords

amputation; amputee; artificial limbs; measurement; prosthesis fitting; residual limb volume; shape; stump; suction; vacuum

Categories

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Education [H235K080004]
  2. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [R01HD060585] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Management of residual limb volume affects decisions regarding timing of fit of the first prosthesis, when a new prosthetic socket is needed, design of a prosthetic socket, and prescription of accommodation strategies for daily volume fluctuations. This systematic review assesses what is known about measurement and management of residual limb volume change in persons with lower-limb amputation. Publications that met inclusion criteria were grouped into three categories: group I: descriptions of residual limb volume measurement techniques; group II: studies investigating the effect of residual limb volume change on clinical care in people with lower-limb amputation; and group Ill: studies of residual limb volume management techniques or descriptions of techniques for accommodating or controlling residual limb volume. We found that many techniques for the measurement of residual limb volume have been described but clinical use is limited largely because current techniques lack adequate resolution and in-socket measurement capability. Overall, limited evidence exists regarding the management of residual limb volume, and the evidence available focuses primarily on adults with transtibial amputation in the early postoperative phase. While we can draw some insights from the available research about residual limb volume measurement and management, further research is required.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available