EARTHQUAKE KNOWLEDGE UPDATE

EARTHQUAKE KNOWLEDGE UPDATEkapak

FOLLOW UP ANDORTHESIS-PROSTHESIS PRACTICE

Serap İncebıyık Satış1 Özlem Altındağ2

1Nev Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Gaziantep, Türkiye
2Gaziantep University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Gaziantep, Türkiye

İncebıyık Satış S, Altındağ Ö. Follow Up and Orthesis-Prosthesis Practice. In: Kalenderer Ö, Servet E, editors. Earthquake Knowledge Update. 1st ed. Ankara: Türkiye Klinikleri; 2025. p.205-215.

ABSTRACT

The magnitude of earthquakes and the attributes of the impacted community might result in varying degrees of injury and fatalities. Individuals frequently encounter musculoskeletal issues associated with compressive forces, crush syndrome, compartment syndrome, and fractures. Many of these folks may also necessitate amputations. Rehabilitation for amputees commences prior to surgery and seeks to recover the functionalities of the amputated limb. Orthoses and prosthetics are widely used for physical impairments during rehabilitation. Assistive technology facilitates full participation in all areas and increases access to positions, education, and social activities. A multidisciplinary team of medical, physical, functional, psychological, social, and professional support is essential for attaining functional independence with a prosthesis. A proactive measure for healthcare providers is to begin prosthetic fitting as soon as wound healing and residual limb remodeling are complete. Orthoses are medical devices used to repair, support, immobilize, or restore function to damaged areas in situations involving organ loss and associated anatomical, physiological, or mechanical dysfunction. These orthoses can function in both static and dynamic modalities. Static orthoses are generally used to restrict joint motion, while dynamic orthoses aim to improve the functionality of the affected limb.Keywords: Orthesis; Prosthesis; Earthquakes

Referanslar

  1. Aras B, Yaşar E. Rehabilitation and prosthesis applications in earthquake-related amputations Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma. 2023;22:625-630.
  2. Şener G, Erbahçeci F. Transfemoral protezler. Protezler-Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon Güncel Teknolojiler Uygulamalar. 3. Baskı. Ankara: Pelikan Yayıncılık. 2015;127-197.
  3. Miramand L, Moisan G, Richard V, McFadyen BJ, Turcot K. Whole body movement strategies during sit-to-stand and stair ascent in individuals with a lower limb amputation: a systematic review. Clin Biomech (Bristol Avon). 2022;100:105811. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  4. Ziegler-Graham K, MacKenzie EJ, Ephraim PL, Travison TG, Brookmeyer R. Estimating the prevalence of limb loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:422-429. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  5. Esquenazi A. Amputation rehabilitation and prosthetic restoration. From surgery to community reintegration. Disabil Rehabil. 2004;26(14):831-836. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  6. van Velzen AD, Nederhand MJ, Emmelot CH, Ijzerman MJ. Early treatment of trans-tibial amputees: retrospective analysis of early fitting and elastic bandaging. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2005;29(1):3-12. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  7. Choo YJ, Boudier-Revéret M, Chang MC. 3D printing technology applied to orthosis manufacturing: narrative review. Ann Palliat Med. 2020;9(6):4262-4270. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  8. Ortiz-Catalan M, Zbinden J, Millenaar J, D’Accolti D, Controzzi M, Clemente F, et al. A highly integrated bionic hand with neural control and feedback for use in daily life. Sci Rob. 2023;8(83):53-61. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  9. Hafner BJ, Willingham LL, Buell NC, Allyn KJ, Smith DG. Evaluation of function, performance, and preference as transfemoral amputees transition from mechanical to microprocessor control of prosthetic knee. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:207-217. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  10. Washington State Health Care Authority (2011) Microprocessor–controlled Lower Limb Prostheses (Health Technology Assessment) The website: program/ mc_lower_prosthetic_final _report. [1]pdf. [Link]
  11. Harvey ZT, Potter BK, Vandersea J, Wolf E. Prosthetic advances. Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances (JSOA). 2012;21(1):58-64.
  12. Detrembleur C, Vanmarsenille JM, De Cuyper F, Dierick F. Relationship between energy cost, gait speed, vertical displacement of centre of body mass and efficiency of pendulumlike mechanism in unilateral amputee gait. Gait Posture 2005;21:333-340. [Crossref]
  13. Baars EC, Geertzen JH. Literature review of the possible advantages of silicon liner socket use in trans-tibial prostheses. Prosthet Orthot Int 2005;29(1):27-37. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  14. van der Linde H, Hofstad CJ, Geurts ACH, Postema K, Geertzen JHB, van Limbeek J. A systematic literature review of the effect of different prosthetic components on human functioning with a lower-limb prosthesis JRRD 2004;41(4):555-570. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  15. Wu Y, Keag Wu Y, Keagy RD, Krick HJ, Betts HB. An innovative removable rigid dressing technique for below-theknee amputation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1979;61:724. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  16. Owimgs MF, Kozak LJ. Ambulatory and inpatient procedures in the United States, 1996, Vital Health Stat 1998;13 (139):1-119.
  17. Knapp D. Transtibial Prosthesis. Lusardi MM, Jorge M, Nielsen C, eds. Orthotics and Prosthesis in Rehabilitation. 3rd ed. Missouri. 2013:622-651. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  18. Huang ME, Miller LA, Lipschutz R, Kuiken TA. Rehabilitation and Prosthetic Restoration In Lower Limb Amputation. BraddomRL, ed. PhysicalMedicine and Rehabilitation. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier-Saunders. 2011:277-316. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  19. Seymour R. Transtibial Components: Clinical Decision Making. Prosthetics and Orthotics, Lower Limb and Spinal USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkin. 2002:175-208. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  20. Goldberg T. Postoperative management of lower extremity amputations. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2006;17(1):173-180. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  21. Göktepe AS, Çakır B, Yılmaz B, Yazıcıoğlu K. Energy expenditure of walking with prostheses: comparison of three amputation levels. Prosthetics and orthotics international 2010;34:31-36. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  22. Esquenazi A, Meier R. Rehabilitation in limb deficiency: part 4. limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1966;77:18. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  23. Theeven PJ, Hemmen B, Brink PR, Smeets RJ, Seelen HA. Measures and procedures utilized to determine the added value of microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee joints: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:333. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  24. Şener G, Erbahçeci F. Kalça dezartikülasyon ve hemipelvektomi protezleri. Protezler Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon Güncel Teknolojiler Uygulamalar. 3. Baskı. Ankara: Pelikan Yayıncılık. 2015:199-209. [Crossref]
  25. Michael JW, Jorge M. Prosthetic options for persons with high-level and bilateral lower limb amputation. In: Lusardi MM, Jorge M, Nielson CC, eds. Orthotic & Prosthetics in Rehabilitation. 3rd ed. St Louis, Missouri: Elsevie Inc. 2013:685-96. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  26. Resnik L, Meucci MR, Lieberman-Klinger S, Fantini C, Kelty DL, Disla R, et al. Advanced upper limb prosthetic devices: implications for upper limb prosthetic rehabilitation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93(4):710-717. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  27. Paterno L, Ibrahimi M, Gruppioni E, Menciassi A, Ricotti L. Sockets for Limb Prostheses: A Review of Existing Technologies and Open Challenges. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2018;65(9):1996-2010.
  28. Afshar A, Mihut D. Enhancing durability of 3D printed polymer structures by metallization. J. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2020;53:185-191. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  29. Tofail SAM, Koumoulos EP, Bandyopadhyay A, Bose S, O’Donoghue L, Charitidis CA. Additive manufacturing: scientific and technological challenges, market uptake and opportunities. Materials Today. 2017;21(1):22-37. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  30. Murr LE. Frontiers of 3D printing/additive manufacturing: from human organs to aircraft fabrication. J Mater Sci Technol. 2016;32:987-995. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  31. Adugna MB, Nabbouh F, Shehata S, Ghahari S. Barriers and facilitators to healthcare access for children with disabilities in low and middle income sub-Saharan African countries: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):15. [Crossref]  [PubMed]  [PMC]
  32. Figueiredo J, Moreno JC, Matias AC, Pereira F, Santos CP. Outcome measures and motion capture systems for assessing lower limb orthosis-based interventions after stroke: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2021;16(6):674-683. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  33. Borg J, Lindström A, Larsson S. Assistive technology in developing countries: a review from the perspective of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2011;35(1):20-29. [Crossref]  [PubMed]
  34. Ramstrand N, Maddock A, Johansson M, Felixon L. The lived experience of people who require prostheses or orthoses in the Kingdom of Cambodia: A qualitative study. Disabil Health J. 2021;14(3):101071. [Crossref]  [PubMed]