The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

A comparison between evidence-generated transtibial sockets and conventional computer-aided designs, from the patient’s perspective

A comparison between evidence-generated transtibial sockets and conventional computer-aided designs, from the patient’s perspective
A comparison between evidence-generated transtibial sockets and conventional computer-aided designs, from the patient’s perspective
Objective: personalised prosthetic socket design depends upon skilled prosthetists who aim to balance functional human-prosthesis coupling with safe, comfortable load transmission to skin and soft tissues. This study’s objective was to assess the comfort of sockets generated from past computer aided socket design records.

Design: a crossover non-inferiority trial with embedded qualitative interview study.

Setting: three United Kingdom National Health Service clinics.

Participants: seventeen people with nineteen transtibial amputations.

Intervention: Evidence-Generated sockets and conventional clinician-led computer aided (Control) designs

Main Measures: Socket Comfort Score and semi-structured interview.

Results: Evidence-Generated sockets had no statistically-significant difference in comfort compared to clinician-led Control sockets (p=0.38, effect size=0.08), but a lower socket comfort score variability across the group. Analysis of interviews revealed themes around fitting session experiences, similarities and differences between the Evidence-Generated and Control sockets, and residual limb factors impacting perceptions of socket comfort. These provided insights into the participants’ experience of the study and the value of expert prosthetist input in socket design.

Conclusions: Evidence-Generated sockets demonstrated noninferiority to conventional clinical computer aided design practice in terms of socket comfort. Both quantitative and qualitative results indicated how clinician input remains essential and is valued by prosthesis users. Work is underway to incorporate the evidence-generated sockets into computer aided design software such that they can act as a digital starting point for modification by expert clinicians at fitting, potentially reducing time spent on basic design, enabling prosthetists to focus on more highly-skilled customisation and co-design with their patients.
medRxiv
Mbithi, Florence
6bf4f420-1a97-4096-b73b-6ffc02b76a21
Donovan-Hall, Maggie
5f138055-2162-4982-846c-5c92411055e0
Bramley, Jennifer Louise
c3052a9d-6fef-43fc-bc60-96e53e1c4f04
Steer, Joshua
e3b35b14-c43b-4df7-90dc-857cf1536e8c
Rossides, Harry
fab00bd8-4f55-450d-aa36-24334212e1e9
Worsley, Pete
6d33aee3-ef43-468d-aef6-86d190de6756
Ostler, Chantel Marie
c5e34ffb-7763-4fc0-98a4-128d1ed5d967
Metcalf, Cheryl
09a47264-8bd5-43bd-a93e-177992c22c72
Hannett, Dominic
9ddbc3ae-6284-41e3-9f97-0df822217441
Ward, Caroline
3c79702b-f567-44ae-ae8c-12658707f112
Kitchen, Jack
c5eb2870-9963-4ca0-bb6b-8f4aadfdad13
Steventon, Sioned
679afdf7-a02e-4024-8d5f-f217d091d260
McIntosh, Katy
cc51c31e-a74f-4aa6-9070-9fcc8d5c97f9
Guo, Shigong
526e21fd-4dc0-40e6-abaf-17d083728c2e
Harvey, Helen
e62a576b-9c9f-4c54-84e2-09d53d8da029
Henderson Slater, David
7b241c59-a805-470b-aaa6-edb5a2f21770
Kolli, Vijay
89ca6ef0-c3ab-4bfc-a220-0d1a026025c3
Dickinson, Alex
10151972-c1b5-4f7d-bc12-6482b5870cad
Mbithi, Florence
6bf4f420-1a97-4096-b73b-6ffc02b76a21
Donovan-Hall, Maggie
5f138055-2162-4982-846c-5c92411055e0
Bramley, Jennifer Louise
c3052a9d-6fef-43fc-bc60-96e53e1c4f04
Steer, Joshua
e3b35b14-c43b-4df7-90dc-857cf1536e8c
Rossides, Harry
fab00bd8-4f55-450d-aa36-24334212e1e9
Worsley, Pete
6d33aee3-ef43-468d-aef6-86d190de6756
Ostler, Chantel Marie
c5e34ffb-7763-4fc0-98a4-128d1ed5d967
Metcalf, Cheryl
09a47264-8bd5-43bd-a93e-177992c22c72
Hannett, Dominic
9ddbc3ae-6284-41e3-9f97-0df822217441
Ward, Caroline
3c79702b-f567-44ae-ae8c-12658707f112
Kitchen, Jack
c5eb2870-9963-4ca0-bb6b-8f4aadfdad13
Steventon, Sioned
679afdf7-a02e-4024-8d5f-f217d091d260
McIntosh, Katy
cc51c31e-a74f-4aa6-9070-9fcc8d5c97f9
Guo, Shigong
526e21fd-4dc0-40e6-abaf-17d083728c2e
Harvey, Helen
e62a576b-9c9f-4c54-84e2-09d53d8da029
Henderson Slater, David
7b241c59-a805-470b-aaa6-edb5a2f21770
Kolli, Vijay
89ca6ef0-c3ab-4bfc-a220-0d1a026025c3
Dickinson, Alex
10151972-c1b5-4f7d-bc12-6482b5870cad

[Unknown type: UNSPECIFIED]

Record type: UNSPECIFIED

Abstract

Objective: personalised prosthetic socket design depends upon skilled prosthetists who aim to balance functional human-prosthesis coupling with safe, comfortable load transmission to skin and soft tissues. This study’s objective was to assess the comfort of sockets generated from past computer aided socket design records.

Design: a crossover non-inferiority trial with embedded qualitative interview study.

Setting: three United Kingdom National Health Service clinics.

Participants: seventeen people with nineteen transtibial amputations.

Intervention: Evidence-Generated sockets and conventional clinician-led computer aided (Control) designs

Main Measures: Socket Comfort Score and semi-structured interview.

Results: Evidence-Generated sockets had no statistically-significant difference in comfort compared to clinician-led Control sockets (p=0.38, effect size=0.08), but a lower socket comfort score variability across the group. Analysis of interviews revealed themes around fitting session experiences, similarities and differences between the Evidence-Generated and Control sockets, and residual limb factors impacting perceptions of socket comfort. These provided insights into the participants’ experience of the study and the value of expert prosthetist input in socket design.

Conclusions: Evidence-Generated sockets demonstrated noninferiority to conventional clinical computer aided design practice in terms of socket comfort. Both quantitative and qualitative results indicated how clinician input remains essential and is valued by prosthesis users. Work is underway to incorporate the evidence-generated sockets into computer aided design software such that they can act as a digital starting point for modification by expert clinicians at fitting, potentially reducing time spent on basic design, enabling prosthetists to focus on more highly-skilled customisation and co-design with their patients.

Text
Preprint 2024 09 17 - Author's Original
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (551kB)
Text
Preprint 2024 09 06 - Author's Original
Restricted to Repository staff only
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Request a copy

More information

In preparation date: August 2024
Submitted date: 6 September 2024
Published date: 18 September 2024

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 493705
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/493705
PURE UUID: 332a8203-b64b-45da-a3a7-7ad301e68e69
ORCID for Florence Mbithi: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-6103-7996
ORCID for Pete Worsley: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0003-0145-5042
ORCID for Chantel Marie Ostler: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8267-2892
ORCID for Cheryl Metcalf: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-7404-6066
ORCID for Alex Dickinson: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-9647-1944

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 11 Sep 2024 16:48
Last modified: 12 Nov 2024 03:08

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Florence Mbithi ORCID iD
Author: Jennifer Louise Bramley
Author: Joshua Steer
Author: Harry Rossides
Author: Pete Worsley ORCID iD
Author: Chantel Marie Ostler ORCID iD
Author: Cheryl Metcalf ORCID iD
Author: Dominic Hannett
Author: Caroline Ward
Author: Jack Kitchen
Author: Sioned Steventon
Author: Katy McIntosh
Author: Shigong Guo
Author: Helen Harvey
Author: David Henderson Slater
Author: Vijay Kolli
Author: Alex Dickinson ORCID iD

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×