Clinical Rehabilitation

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jones, M E
Right arrow Articles by Bliokas, V V
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jones, M E
Right arrow Articles by Bliokas, V V
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 15, No. 2, 172-176 (2001)
DOI: 10.1191/026921501676151107
© 2001 SAGE Publications

Weight-bearing, pain and walking velocity during primary transtibial amputee rehabilitation

M E Jones

G M Bashford

V V Bliokas

Illawarra Area Health Service, Port Kembla Hospital, Warrawong, NSW, Australia

Objective: To explore the relationships between weight-bearing, pain and walking velocity in the first four weeks of prosthetic training.

Subjects: Consecutively referred transtibial amputees (n = 27).

Design: Longitudinal study.

Setting: Inpatient rehabilitation centre.

Interventions: Measurements of static weight-bearing (SWB), perceived pain during the SWB test and self-selected walking velocity (VEL) were taken at entry, and at four weeks into the prosthetic training programme. Path analysis was conducted using a series of linear regression analyses to determine predictors of walking velocity at week 4.

Results: Significant improvements from week 1 to week 4 were found in SWB, reported pain and velocity. SWB at week 4, when coupled with age, predicted 66% of the variance in walking velocity at week 4. Pain did not directly predict velocity. However, SWB at entry and perceived pain at week 4 predicted 56% of the variance in SWB at week 4.

Conclusions: These analyses suggested a model in which SWB and age were both significantly related to velocity, and further, that pain played a role in velocity through a relationship mediated by its direct effect on SWB. Unlike age, SWB is a predictor of velocity that might be altered through pain reduction, wound-healing and rehabilitative interventions.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?