Development and measurement properties of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS): A comprehensive set of clinical outcome instruments

The need to measure and evaluate orthotics and prosthetics (O&P) practice has received growing recognition in the past several years. Reliable and valid self-report instruments are needed that can help facilities evaluate patient outcomes. The objective of this project was to develop a set of self-report instruments that assess functional status, quality of life, and satisfaction with devices and services that can be used in an orthotics and prosthetics clinic. Selecting items from a variety of existing instruments, the authors developed and revised four instruments that differentiate patients with varying levels of lower limb function, quality of life, and satisfaction with devices and services. Evidence of construct validity is provided by hierarchies of item difficulty that are consistent with clinical experience. For example, with the lower limb function instrument, running one block was much more difficult than walking indoors. The instruments demonstrate adequate internal consistency (0.88 for lower limb function, 0.88 for quality of life, 0.74 for service satisfaction, 0.78 for device satisfaction). The next steps in their research programme are to evaluate sensitivity and construct validity. The Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS) is a promising self-report instrument which may, with further development, allow orthotic and prosthetic practitioners to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of their services as required by accreditation standards such as those of the American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics that mandate quality assessment.

[1]  B. Wright,et al.  Best test design , 1979 .

[2]  Amputee rehabilitation: critical factors in outcome. , 1981 .

[3]  J. Bowker Amputee rehabilitation: critical factors in outcome. , 1981, The Journal of the Arkansas Medical Society.

[4]  Georg Rasch,et al.  Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests , 1981, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[5]  E. Bleck Compartment Syndromes and Volkmann??s Contracture , 1982 .

[6]  G. Masters,et al.  Rating Scale Analysis. Rasch Measurement. , 1983 .

[7]  A. Donabedian,et al.  The quality of care. How can it be assessed? , 1988, JAMA.

[8]  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.

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

[10]  J. Linacre,et al.  Sample size and item calibration stability , 1994 .

[11]  CONFERENCE REPORT: AN AGENDA FOR MEDICAL REHABILITATION OUTCOMES RESEARCH , 1995, Journal of allied health.

[12]  L. Hoxie Outcomes Measurement: A Primer for Orthotic and Prosthetic Care , 1995 .

[13]  J. Ware,et al.  Assessment tools: functional health status and patient satisfaction. , 1996, American journal of medical quality : the official journal of the American College of Medical Quality.

[14]  Outcomes Measurement and Clinical Pathways , 1996 .

[15]  S. Pruitt,et al.  Functional status in children with limb deficiency: development and initial validation of an outcome measure. , 1996, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[16]  Facing the Future of Orthotics and Prosthetics Proactively: Theory and Practice of Outcomes Measures as a Method for Determining Quality of Services , 1997 .

[17]  Sheri D. Pruitt,et al.  Functional status in limb deficiency: development of an outcome measure for preschool children. , 1998, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[18]  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.

[19]  D. Hart Orthotics and Prosthetics National Office Outcomes Tool (opot): Initial Reliability and Validity Assessment for Lower Extremity Prosthetics , 1999 .

[20]  S. Naumann,et al.  The Prosthetic Upper Extremity Functional Index: development and reliability testing of a new functional status questionnaire for children who use upper extremity prostheses. , 2001, Journal of Hand Therapy.

[21]  E. Mackenzie,et al.  Use and Satisfaction with Prosthetic Devices Among Persons with Trauma-Related Amputations: A Long-Term Outcome Study , 2001, American journal of physical medicine & rehabilitation.

[22]  J. Ware SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide , 2003 .