A questionnaire survey of the effect of different interface types on patient satisfaction and perceived problems among trans-tibial amputees.

Abstract

The objectives were to investigate the effect of three different interface types on consumer satisfaction and perceived problems among trans-tibial amputees in the Netherlands. A postal questionnaire (based on the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire) was sent to 353 patients. Responders were classified in three groups of interface types: polyethylene foam (PEF) inserts, silicone liners (SIL), and polyurethane liners (PUL). Differences concerning satisfaction and problems between interface types were computed and adjusted for potential confounding by age, gender, reason for amputation and time since first prosthesis. A total of 220 patients responded (62%). Patients wearing liners reported a significantly poorer durability and higher maintenance time compared with patients using PEF inserts. Sum-scores for satisfaction or problems did not show any significant differences between groups. Analysis of individual items showed a significant difference only for satisfaction with sitting and with walking on uneven terrain in favour of PEF inserts. In contrast to most studies, interface type was included as a possible determinant of customer use, satisfaction, and perceived problems. The perceived differences between the three suspension types are to a large extent small and non-significant. The findings do not support liner prescription as a matter of course for all trans-tibial amputees. A careful analysis of patients' preferences should be made to determine the best course of action. Further studies, preferably prospective, need to be conducted to determine which systems are most comfortable and offer least complaints.