Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists: Results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program

Ignacio Gaunaurd, Susan E. Spaulding, Dagmar Amtmann, Rana Salem, Robert Gailey, Sara J. Morgan, Brian J. Hafner

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Outcome measures can be used in prosthetic practices to evaluate interventions, inform decision making, monitor progress, document outcomes, and justify services. Strategies to enhance prosthetists' ability to use outcome measures are needed to facilitate their adoption in routine practice. Objective: To assess prosthetists' use of outcome measures and evaluate the effects of training on their confidence in administering performance-based measures. Study design: Cross-sectional and single-group pretest-posttest survey. Methods: Seventy-nine certified prosthetists (mean of 16.0 years of clinical experience) were surveyed about their experiences with 20 standardized outcome measures. Prosthetists were formally trained by the investigators to administer the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor. Prosthetists' confidence in administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor was measured before and after training. Results: The majority of prosthetists (62%) were classified as non-routine outcome measure users. Confidence administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor prior to training was low-to-moderate across the study sample. Training significantly (p 0.0001) improved prosthetists' confidence in administering both instruments. Conclusion: Prosthetists in this study reported limited use of and confidence with standardized outcome measures. Interactive training resulted in a statistically significant increase of prosthetists' confidence in administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor and may facilitate use of outcome measures in clinical practice. Clinical relevance Frequency of outcome measure use in the care of persons with limb loss has not been studied. Study results suggest that prosthetists may not regularly use standardized outcome measures and report limited confidence in administering them. Training enhances confidence and may encourage use of outcome measures in clinical practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)314-321
Number of pages8
JournalProsthetics and Orthotics International
Volume39
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Education
Amputees
Surveys and Questionnaires
Aptitude
Decision Making
Extremities
Cross-Sectional Studies
Research Personnel

Keywords

  • confidence
  • prosthetist
  • Standardized outcome measures
  • training

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation
  • Health Professions (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists : Results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program. / Gaunaurd, Ignacio; Spaulding, Susan E.; Amtmann, Dagmar; Salem, Rana; Gailey, Robert; Morgan, Sara J.; Hafner, Brian J.

In: Prosthetics and Orthotics International, Vol. 39, No. 4, 01.01.2015, p. 314-321.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Gaunaurd, Ignacio ; Spaulding, Susan E. ; Amtmann, Dagmar ; Salem, Rana ; Gailey, Robert ; Morgan, Sara J. ; Hafner, Brian J. / Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists : Results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program. In: Prosthetics and Orthotics International. 2015 ; Vol. 39, No. 4. pp. 314-321.
@article{147dde5d5bdb4baf92cc97282d26ef79,
title = "Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists: Results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program",
abstract = "Background: Outcome measures can be used in prosthetic practices to evaluate interventions, inform decision making, monitor progress, document outcomes, and justify services. Strategies to enhance prosthetists' ability to use outcome measures are needed to facilitate their adoption in routine practice. Objective: To assess prosthetists' use of outcome measures and evaluate the effects of training on their confidence in administering performance-based measures. Study design: Cross-sectional and single-group pretest-posttest survey. Methods: Seventy-nine certified prosthetists (mean of 16.0 years of clinical experience) were surveyed about their experiences with 20 standardized outcome measures. Prosthetists were formally trained by the investigators to administer the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor. Prosthetists' confidence in administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor was measured before and after training. Results: The majority of prosthetists (62{\%}) were classified as non-routine outcome measure users. Confidence administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor prior to training was low-to-moderate across the study sample. Training significantly (p 0.0001) improved prosthetists' confidence in administering both instruments. Conclusion: Prosthetists in this study reported limited use of and confidence with standardized outcome measures. Interactive training resulted in a statistically significant increase of prosthetists' confidence in administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor and may facilitate use of outcome measures in clinical practice. Clinical relevance Frequency of outcome measure use in the care of persons with limb loss has not been studied. Study results suggest that prosthetists may not regularly use standardized outcome measures and report limited confidence in administering them. Training enhances confidence and may encourage use of outcome measures in clinical practice.",
keywords = "confidence, prosthetist, Standardized outcome measures, training",
author = "Ignacio Gaunaurd and Spaulding, {Susan E.} and Dagmar Amtmann and Rana Salem and Robert Gailey and Morgan, {Sara J.} and Hafner, {Brian J.}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/0309364614532865",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "39",
pages = "314--321",
journal = "Prosthetics and Orthotics International",
issn = "0309-3646",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists

T2 - Results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program

AU - Gaunaurd, Ignacio

AU - Spaulding, Susan E.

AU - Amtmann, Dagmar

AU - Salem, Rana

AU - Gailey, Robert

AU - Morgan, Sara J.

AU - Hafner, Brian J.

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Background: Outcome measures can be used in prosthetic practices to evaluate interventions, inform decision making, monitor progress, document outcomes, and justify services. Strategies to enhance prosthetists' ability to use outcome measures are needed to facilitate their adoption in routine practice. Objective: To assess prosthetists' use of outcome measures and evaluate the effects of training on their confidence in administering performance-based measures. Study design: Cross-sectional and single-group pretest-posttest survey. Methods: Seventy-nine certified prosthetists (mean of 16.0 years of clinical experience) were surveyed about their experiences with 20 standardized outcome measures. Prosthetists were formally trained by the investigators to administer the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor. Prosthetists' confidence in administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor was measured before and after training. Results: The majority of prosthetists (62%) were classified as non-routine outcome measure users. Confidence administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor prior to training was low-to-moderate across the study sample. Training significantly (p 0.0001) improved prosthetists' confidence in administering both instruments. Conclusion: Prosthetists in this study reported limited use of and confidence with standardized outcome measures. Interactive training resulted in a statistically significant increase of prosthetists' confidence in administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor and may facilitate use of outcome measures in clinical practice. Clinical relevance Frequency of outcome measure use in the care of persons with limb loss has not been studied. Study results suggest that prosthetists may not regularly use standardized outcome measures and report limited confidence in administering them. Training enhances confidence and may encourage use of outcome measures in clinical practice.

AB - Background: Outcome measures can be used in prosthetic practices to evaluate interventions, inform decision making, monitor progress, document outcomes, and justify services. Strategies to enhance prosthetists' ability to use outcome measures are needed to facilitate their adoption in routine practice. Objective: To assess prosthetists' use of outcome measures and evaluate the effects of training on their confidence in administering performance-based measures. Study design: Cross-sectional and single-group pretest-posttest survey. Methods: Seventy-nine certified prosthetists (mean of 16.0 years of clinical experience) were surveyed about their experiences with 20 standardized outcome measures. Prosthetists were formally trained by the investigators to administer the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor. Prosthetists' confidence in administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor was measured before and after training. Results: The majority of prosthetists (62%) were classified as non-routine outcome measure users. Confidence administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor prior to training was low-to-moderate across the study sample. Training significantly (p 0.0001) improved prosthetists' confidence in administering both instruments. Conclusion: Prosthetists in this study reported limited use of and confidence with standardized outcome measures. Interactive training resulted in a statistically significant increase of prosthetists' confidence in administering the Timed Up and Go and Amputee Mobility Predictor and may facilitate use of outcome measures in clinical practice. Clinical relevance Frequency of outcome measure use in the care of persons with limb loss has not been studied. Study results suggest that prosthetists may not regularly use standardized outcome measures and report limited confidence in administering them. Training enhances confidence and may encourage use of outcome measures in clinical practice.

KW - confidence

KW - prosthetist

KW - Standardized outcome measures

KW - training

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84947937068&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84947937068&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0309364614532865

DO - 10.1177/0309364614532865

M3 - Article

C2 - 24827935

AN - SCOPUS:84947937068

VL - 39

SP - 314

EP - 321

JO - Prosthetics and Orthotics International

JF - Prosthetics and Orthotics International

SN - 0309-3646

IS - 4

ER -