Rethinking the foam cosmesis for people with lower limb absence

Patient engagement in cosmetic designing of prostheses: current practice and potential outcome benefits

BACKGROUND

Making a prosthesis for an individual with limb loss is a highly personalized process. A currently unexplored area is whether there are tangible benefits in greater patient engagement during the cosmetic designing of their prostheses. We examined the current clinical practice of engaging patients in prosthetic cosmetic designing and identified factors associated with patient outcomes.

METHODS

One hundred and four prosthetists and 28 prosthesis users were surveyed in this cross-sectional study. The questionnaires covered aspects of prosthetic prescription and fabrication, users' perceived level of engagement, and self-reported outcomes. Regression analyses were used to examine the associations between patients' perceived levels of engagement during the design process, satisfaction, and other outcomes.

RESULTS

Seventy-five percent of the prosthesis users reported being offered at least one cosmetic option during the making of their prostheses, which corroborated with 82.7% of the prosthetists reporting that they typically engage their patients in this aspect of their practices. Patients who were offered at least one cosmetic design option reported significantly greater satisfaction ( P = 0.027) than those who were not offered such an option. Patients' level of satisfaction regarding the look of their prostheses was significantly correlated with their perception that their prostheses empower them in daily activities (r = 0.415, P = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Engaging patients in the cosmetic designing of their prostheses is a widely accepted practice. Patients who are more satisfied with the look of their prostheses perceived higher levels of empowerment. Prosthetic practitioners should consider the potential outcome benefits of higher level engagement for users of prosthetic devices.

The Application of Human-Centered Design Approaches in Health Research and Innovation: A Narrative Review of Current Practices

Background

Human-centered design (HCD) approaches to health care strive to support the development of innovative, effective, and person-centered solutions for health care. Although their use is increasing, there is no integral overview describing the details of HCD methods in health innovations.

Objective

This review aims to explore the current practices of HCD approaches for the development of health innovations, with the aim of providing an overview of the applied methods for participatory and HCD processes and highlighting their shortcomings for further research.

Methods

A narrative review of health research was conducted based on systematic electronic searches in the PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and Sociological Abstracts (2000-2020) databases using keywords related to human-centered design, design thinking (DT), and user-centered design (UCD). Abstracts and full-text articles were screened by 2 reviewers independently based on predefined inclusion criteria. Data extraction focused on the methodology used throughout the research process, the choice of methods in different phases of the innovation cycle, and the level of engagement of end users.

Results

This review summarizes the application of HCD practices across various areas of health innovation. All approaches prioritized the user’s needs and the participatory and iterative nature of the design process. The design processes comprised several design cycles during which multiple qualitative and quantitative methods were used in combination with specific design methods. HCD- and DT-based research primarily targeted understanding the research context and defining the problem, whereas UCD-based work focused mainly on the direct generation of solutions. Although UCD approaches involved end users primarily as testers and informants, HCD and DT approaches involved end users most often as design partners.

Conclusions

We have provided an overview of the currently applied methodologies and HCD guidelines to assist health care professionals and design researchers in their methodological choices. HCD-based techniques are challenging to evaluate using traditional biomedical research methods. Previously proposed reporting guidelines are a step forward but would require a level of detail that is incompatible with the current publishing landscape. Hence, further development is needed in this area. Special focus should be placed on the congruence between the chosen methods, design strategy, and achievable outcomes. Furthermore, power dimensions, agency, and intersectionality need to be considered in co-design sessions with multiple stakeholders, especially when including vulnerable groups.

Reflections and future directions for psychological science in Prosthetics and Orthotics International

In the inaugural edition of Prosthetics and Orthotics International in 1977, Dr Sidney Fishman identified the Psychological Sciences as one of six indispensable areas of skill and knowledge in professional prosthetic-orthotic practice. Since then, there have been substantial changes and developments in the complexity and capabilities of assistive technologies, greater emphasis on understanding the relationships between people and enabling technologies, growing recognition of the importance of the contexts and environments that support their use, and changes in both health care services and the professional development of prosthetists and orthotists. The aim of this narrative review is to reflect on the role of Prosthetics and Orthotics International in shaping the evolving understanding of psychology in prosthetics and orthotics. There remains considerable potential and opportunity for the development and application of psychology in addressing the challenges of disability globally. However, a broad interpretation and application of the principles of rehabilitation psychology are needed if we are to meaningfully incorporate psychological science into the knowledge that informs prosthetic and orthotic practice.