Characterizing mobility from the prosthetic limb user’s perspective: Use of focus groups to guide development of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility

Background: Input from target respondents in the development of patient-reported outcome measures is necessary to ensure that the instrument is meaningful. Objectives: To solicit perspectives of prosthetic limb users about their mobility experiences and to inform development of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility. Study design: Qualitative study. Methods: Four focus groups of lower limb prosthesis users were held in different regions of the United States. Focus group transcripts were coded, and themes were identified. Feedback from participants was used to develop a framework for measuring mobility with a lower limb prosthesis. Results: Focus group participants (N = 37) described mobility as a confluence of factors that included characteristics of the individual, activity, and environment. Identified themes were defined as individual characteristics, forms of movement, and environmental situations. Prosthetic mobility was conceptualized as movement activities performed in an environmental or situational context. Conclusion: Respondent feedback used to guide development of Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility established a foundation for a new person-centered measure of mobility with a prosthetic limb. Clinical relevance Perspectives of target respondents are needed to guide development of instruments intended to measure health outcomes. Focus groups of prosthetic limb users were conducted to solicit experiences related to mobility with a lower limb prosthesis. Results were used to inform development of a clinically meaningful, person-centered instrument.

[1]  N. Leidy,et al.  Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1--eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. , 2011, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[2]  L. Vicsek Issues in the Analysis of Focus Groups: Generalisability, Quantifiability, Treatment of Context and Quotations , 2010 .

[3]  S. Reventlow,et al.  The doctor as focus group moderator--shifting roles and negotiating positions in health research. , 2005, Family practice.

[4]  Kurt L. Johnson,et al.  The PROMIS initiative: involvement of rehabilitation stakeholders in development and examples of applications in rehabilitation research. , 2011, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[5]  Aftab E. Patla,et al.  Dimensions of Mobility: Defining the Complexity and Difficulty Associated with Community Mobility , 1999 .

[6]  H. Becker Measuring Health Among People With Disabilities , 2006, Family & community health.

[7]  Helen Scott,et al.  Lower Limb Prosthetic Outcome Measures: A Review of the Literature 1995 to 2005 , 2006 .

[8]  C. Acquadro,et al.  Interviewing to develop Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) measures for clinical research: eliciting patients’ experience , 2014, Health and Quality of Life Outcomes.

[9]  M. Bayliss,et al.  PRO development: rigorous qualitative research as the crucial foundation , 2010, Quality of Life Research.

[10]  C. Murray,et al.  The experience of amputation and prosthesis use for adults: a metasynthesis , 2013, Disability and rehabilitation.

[11]  P. Rumrill,et al.  The use of focus groups in rehabilitation research. , 2008, Work.

[12]  Klaas Postema,et al.  From satisfaction to expectation: The patient's perspective in lower limb prosthetic care , 2007, Disability and rehabilitation.

[13]  G. Breakwell Doing Social Psychology Research , 2008 .

[14]  Daniel J Buysse,et al.  The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. , 2010, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  Pamela Gallagher,et al.  Understanding the benefits of prosthetic prescription: exploring the experiences of practitioners and lower limb prosthetic users , 2011, Disability and rehabilitation.

[16]  M Maclachlan,et al.  Adjustment to an Artificial Limb: A Qualitative Perspective , 2001, Journal of health psychology.

[17]  Helga Wild,et al.  Lower-limb amputee needs assessment using multistakeholder focus-group approach. , 2009, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[18]  D. J. Martin,et al.  Patient information on phantom limb pain: a focus group study of patient experiences, perceptions and opinions. , 2002, Health education research.

[19]  M. Kalfoss,et al.  Spiritual coping in rehabilitation - a comparative study: part 1. , 2013, British journal of nursing.

[20]  Katie G. Egan,et al.  A qualitative study of the experiences of people who identify themselves as having adjusted positively to a visible difference , 2011, Journal of health psychology.

[21]  M. Kalfoss,et al.  Spiritual coping in rehabilitation- a comparative study: part 2. , 2013, British journal of nursing.

[22]  Robert Gailey,et al.  Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists: Results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program , 2015, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[23]  Malcolm MacLachlan,et al.  Development and psychometric evaluation of the Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales (TAPES). , 2000 .

[24]  S. Scott,et al.  Court Reporters: A Viable Solution for the Challenges of Focus Group Data Collection? , 2009, Qualitative health research.

[25]  J. Cappelleri,et al.  Patient-reported outcomes: conceptual issues. , 2007, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[26]  Kurt L. Johnson,et al.  Communicating about the experience of pain and fatigue in disability , 2010, Quality of Life Research.

[27]  Nan Rothrock,et al.  Evaluation of Item Candidates: The PROMIS Qualitative Item Review , 2007, Medical care.