This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Datta, D. Articles by Davey, N. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Datta, D. Articles by Davey, N. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Functional outcome of patients with proximal upper limb deficiency–acquired and congenital

Mobility and Specialised Rehabilitation Centre, Northern General Hospital, Nottingham, UK

Kanther Selvarajah

Northern General Hospital, Sheffield, now at University Hospital Aintree, Lower Lane, Liverpool, Nottingham, UK

Nicola Davey

City Hospital, Nottingham, UK

Objective: To investigate the functional outcome of patients with proximal upper limb deficiency – acquired and congenital (elbow disarticulation, transhumeral, shoulder disarticulation and forequarter level).

Design: Cohort observational study.

Subjects: All proximal upper limb amputees and patients with congenital upper limb absence currently registered with the Sheffeld Mobility and Specialised Rehabilitation Centre.

Methods: A self-administered postal questionnaire and medical records were used to collect data. The questionnaire obtained information about demographic details, dominancy of the amputated arm and independence and participation in activities of daily living (ADL), domestic and recreational activities. The prevalence of pain in the phantom limb and stump, and information regarding the remaining arm was also obtained. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was used to evaluate the psychological state of the subjects.

Results: Trauma was the commonest cause of proximal upper limb loss (71.25%). Transhumeral amputation was the predominant level (78.75%). Although 73.2% returned to work following amputation, 66.6% had to change job. Overall rejection rate of prosthesis was 33.75%. Twenty-five per cent of patients found the prosthesis beneficial for driving and a small proportion used the prosthesis for employment and recreational activities, but the vast majority used the prosthesis primarily for cosmesis. Pain in the phantom limb was reported in 60% of our patients but there was no significant correlation between this and depression. Symptoms of overuse injury in the nonamputated limb were higher than expected in the normal population.

Conclusion: As many as 33.75% of patients with proximal upper limb deficiency rejected their prostheses and many who continue to wear them do not find them useful in ADL and employment, etc. It is vital that rehabilitation programmes should focus on both prosthetic and nonprosthetic training to achieve maximal independence.

Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 18, No. 2, 172-177 (2004)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215504cr716oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?