Comparative Study between Dermo, Pelite, and Seal-In X5 Liners: Effect on Patient's Satisfaction and Perceived Problems

Purpose. This study aimed to compare the effect of satisfaction and perceived problems between Pelite, Dermo with shuttle lock, and Seal-In X5 liners on the transtibial amputees. Material and Methods. A total of thirty transtibial amputees (17 male, 13 female) volunteered to take part in this research. Two prostheses were fabricated for each participant. Prosthetic Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ) was filled in by the participants with the three liners. Results. The statistics highlight that Dermo liner showed significantly higher score (P = 0.05) in walking, walking on uneven surfaces, stairs walking, fitting, donning/doffing, sitting, suspension, and overall satisfaction with Dermo liner compared with Seal-In X5 and Pelite liners. Overall satisfaction was 34% higher with Dermo liner than Seal-In X5 liner and 28% higher than Pelite liner. Participants reported less problems with Dermo liner and significant differences (P < 0.05) were recorded between the three liners in sweating, skin irritation, frustration, and pain compared with Seal-In X5 and Pelite liners. Conclusion. Participants experienced high level of satisfaction and practiced fewer problems with Dermo liner. These results showed that there is good indication to believe that Dermo liner might be a good choice for transtibial users and might help the clinicians and prosthetic practitioners in selection criteria of prosthetic liners.

[1]  S G Zachariah,et al.  Effects of changes in cadence, prosthetic componentry, and time on interface pressures and shear stresses of three trans-tibial amputees. , 2000, Clinical biomechanics.

[2]  J. Geertzen,et al.  Literature review of the possible advantages of silicon liner socket use in trans-tibial prostheses , 2005, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[3]  Thomas Bertels,et al.  BREATHABLE LINER FOR TRANSRADIAL PROSTHESES , 2011 .

[4]  Hossein Gholizadeh,et al.  Clinical investigation of the interface pressure in the trans-tibial socket with Dermo and Seal-In X5 liner during walking and their effect on patient satisfaction. , 2012, Clinical biomechanics.

[5]  A. Stenström,et al.  Effect on gait and socket comfort in unilateral trans-tibial amputees after exchange to a polyurethane concept , 2004, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[6]  W. Lee,et al.  Load transfer mechanics between trans-tibial prosthetic socket and residual limb--dynamic effects. , 2004, Journal of biomechanics.

[7]  Jan H B Geertzen,et al.  Skin problems in lower limb amputees: A systematic review , 2006, Disability and rehabilitation.

[8]  G D Reiber,et al.  Prosthesis evaluation questionnaire for persons with lower limb amputations: assessing prosthesis-related quality of life. , 1998, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[9]  Ming Zhang,et al.  Biomechanics of pressure ulcer in body tissues interacting with external forces during locomotion. , 2010, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[10]  Noor Azuan Abu Osman,et al.  Qualitative study of prosthetic suspension systems on transtibial amputees' satisfaction and perceived problems with their prosthetic devices. , 2012, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[11]  D. Shurr,et al.  The Prevalence of Dermatological Problems for Transtibial Amputees Using a Roll-on Liner , 2008 .

[12]  H. Ogata,et al.  Total surface bearing below-knee prosthesis: advantages, disadvantages, and clinical implications. , 1998, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[13]  D. Windt,et al.  A questionnaire survey of the effect of different interface types on patient satisfaction and perceived problems among trans-tibial amputees. , 2005 .

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

[15]  James Cho Hong Goh,et al.  Comparative study between patellar-tendon-bearing and pressure cast prosthetic sockets. , 2004, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[16]  F B Van de Weg,et al.  A questionnaire survey of the effect of different interface types on patient satisfaction and perceived problems among trans-tibial amputees , 2005, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[17]  A. Heinemann,et al.  Development and measurement properties of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS): A comprehensive set of clinical outcome instruments , 2003, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[18]  J Cluitmans,et al.  Experiences with respect to the ICEROSS system for trans-tibial prostheses , 1994, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[19]  Shawn C Marshall,et al.  Dermatologic conditions associated with use of a lower-extremity prosthesis. , 2005, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[20]  J P Paul.  Comparison of computational analysis with clinical measurement of stresses on a below-knee residual limb in a prosthetic socket [Medical Engineering & Physics 22 (2000):607-12]. , 2001, Medical engineering & physics.

[21]  Sheridan Laing,et al.  Engineering a trans-tibial prosthetic socket for the lower limb amputee. , 2011, Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore.

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

[23]  S. Gard,et al.  Effect of prosthetic gel liner thickness on gait biomechanics and pressure distribution within the transtibial socket. , 2012, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[24]  Angus McFadyen,et al.  Dynamic interface pressure distributions of two transtibial prosthetic socket concepts. , 2009, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[25]  K Yiğiter,et al.  Comparison of the effects of patellar tendon bearing and total surface bearing sockets on prosthetic fitting and rehabilitation , 2002, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[26]  Noor Azuan Abu Osman,et al.  Interface pressure in transtibial socket during ascent and descent on stairs and its effect on patient satisfaction. , 2013, Clinical biomechanics.

[27]  Brian J Hafner,et al.  Differences in function and safety between Medicare Functional Classification Level-2 and -3 transfemoral amputees and influence of prosthetic knee joint control. , 2009, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[28]  I McCurdie,et al.  ICEROSS — a consensus view: A questionnaire survey of the use of ICEROSS in the United Kingdom , 1997, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[29]  C. Gauthier-Gagnon,et al.  Prosthetic profile of people with lower extremity amputation: conception and design of a follow-up questionnaire. , 1993, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[30]  D Datta,et al.  Outcome of fitting an ICEROSS prosthesis: Views of trans-tibial amputees , 1996, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[31]  M. Zhang,et al.  Comparison of computational analysis with clinical measurement of stresses on below-knee residual limb in a prosthetic socket. , 2000, Medical engineering & physics.

[32]  David A Boone,et al.  Quantification of prosthetic outcomes: elastomeric gel liner with locking pin suspension versus polyethylene foam liner with neoprene sleeve suspension. , 2004, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[33]  J. Sanders,et al.  Clinical study: Changes in interface pressure and stump shape over time: Preliminary results from a transtibial amputee subject , 2000, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[34]  C. Gauthier-Gagnon,et al.  Prosthetic profile of the amputee questionnaire: validity and reliability. , 1994, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[35]  Chih-Han Chang,et al.  Effects of liner stiffness for trans-tibial prosthesis: a finite element contact model. , 2004, Medical engineering & physics.

[36]  John Fergason,et al.  Comparison of satisfaction with current prosthetic care in veterans and servicemembers from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts with major traumatic limb loss. , 2010, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[37]  V. C. Roberts,et al.  Clinical investigation of the pressure and shear stress on the trans-tibial stump with a prosthesis. , 1998, Medical engineering & physics.

[38]  Ming Zhang,et al.  Pressure distribution at the stump/socket interface in transtibial amputees during walking on stairs, slope and non-flat road. , 2006, Clinical Biomechanics.

[39]  J. D. Morrison,et al.  Polyurethane gel liner usage in the Oxford Prosthetic Service , 2001, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[40]  W. Eisma,et al.  Silicone Suction Socket (3s) Versus Supracondylar Ptb Prosthesis with Pelite Liner: Transtibial Amputees' Preferences , 1996 .