Page 20 - REV T-I JOURNAL INTERIOR ISSUU 18 2-3

96 HIGHSMITH ET AL. TRANSTIBIAL ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS 97

prosthetic care has some representation, discrete top- American Orthotics and Prosthetics Association, the AP, Norvell DC, Czerniecki JM. Prosthetic fit- 20. Hafner B. State of the science evidence report
ics of interest to the prosthetic clinical community American Academy of Orthotists & Prosthetists, and ting, use, and satisfaction following lower-limb guidelines. Washington (DC): American Acad-
were not represented, including topics such as pros- the National Institutes of Health Scholars in Patient amputation: a prospective study. J Rehabil Res emy of Orthotists & Prosthetists; 2008.
thetic suspension, feet, newer socket designs (i.e., Oriented Research (SPOR) grant (1K30RR22270). Dev. 2012;49(10):1493-1504. 21. Carey SL, Lura DJ, Highsmith MJ. Differences
elevated vacuum), and others. Finally, this body of 11. Dobson DaVanzo & Associates, LLC. Retro- in myoelectric and body-powered upper-limb
literature is biased to include predominantly the per- REFERENCES spective cohort study of the economic value of prostheses: systematic literature review. J Reha-
spective of the care provider, their practice facility, or 1. Blough DK, Hubbard S, McFarland LV, Smith orthotic and prosthetic services among Medicare bil Res Dev. 2015;52(3):247-262.
a care system. These are limited because cost burden beneficiaries. Final report. Vienna (VA): Dob- 22. Gordon R, Magee C, Frazer A, Evans C,
to society, the patient, or the payor are not accounted DG, Gambel JM, Reiber GE. Prosthetic cost pro- son DaVanzo & Associates, LLC; 2013 [accessed McCosker K. An interim prosthesis program
for. jections for servicemembers with major limb loss 2015 Mar 31]. http://mobilitysaves.org/docs/ for lower limb amputees: comparison of public
from Vietnam and OIF/OEF. J Rehabil Res Dev. Dobson_Davanzo_Study_on_Cost_Effective- and private models of service. Prosthet Orthot
2010;47(4):387-402.
CONCLUSIONS 2. Levinson DR. Questionable billing by suppliers ness.pdf. 2013. Int. 2010;34(2):175-183.
The comparative economic literature in transtibial of lower limb prostheses. Washington (DC): U.S. 12. Yong YV, Shafie AA. Economic evaluation of 23. MacKenzie EJ, Jones AS, Bosse MJ, Castillo RC,
prosthetics is presently insufficient for further review, Dept. of Health and Human Services; 2011. enhanced asthma management: a systematic Pollak AN, Webb LX, Swiontkowski MF, Kel-
conclusion, and policy guidance. Six cost-identifi- 3. Dillingham TR, Pezzin LE, Shore AD. Reampu- review. Pharm. Pract. (Granada). 2014;12(4):493. lam JF, Smith DG, Sanders RW, Jones AL, Starr
cation or cost-consequence articles were eligible for tation, mortality, and health care costs among 13. World Development Indicators; PPP conversion AJ, McAndrew MP, Patterson BM, Burgess AR.
scoring in three topical areas: Care Models, Prosthetic persons with dysvascular lower-limb amputa- factor (GDP) to market exchange rate ratio. The Health-care costs associated with amputation
Treatment, and Prosthetic Sockets. From these, five tions. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(3):480-486. World Bank Group; 2015 [accessed 2015 Oct 12]. or reconstruction of a limb-threatening injury.
evidence statements were synthesized, with one sup- 4. Hofstad CJ, van der Linde H, van Limbeek J, http://data.worldbank.org. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89A(8):1685-1692.
ported by sufficient evidence to provide moderate Postema K. Prescription of prosthetic ankle- 14. World Development Indicators; Inflation, GDP 24. Gil J, Schiff AP, Pinzur MS. Cost comparison:
confidence regarding comparable cost between total- foot mechanisms after lower limb amputation. deflator (annual %). The World Bank Group; limb salvage versus amputation in diabetic
contact and specific weight-bearing socket designs Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004(1):CD003978. 2015 [accessed 2015 Oct 12]. http://data.world- patients with charcot foot. Foot Ankle Int.
when clinic visits, adjustments, and initial costs are 5. Smith DG, McFarland LV, Sangeorzan BJ, Reiber bank.org. 2013;34(8):1097-1099.
considered in the short term. Further and more GE, Czerniecki JM. Postoperative dressing and 15. Chiou CF, Hay JW, Wallace JF, Bloom BS, Neu- 25. Datta D, Harris I, Heller B, Howitt J, Martin R.
sophisticated economic analyses of transtibial pros- management strategies for transtibial ampu- mann PJ, Sullivan SD, Yu HT, Keeler EB, Henning Gait, cost and time implications for changing
thetic interventions are needed in order to determine tations: a critical review. J Prosthet Orthot. JM, Ofman JJ. Development and validation of a from PTB to ICEX (R) sockets. Prosthet Orthot
value related to device provision and maintenance, 2004;16(3S):15-25. grading system for the quality of cost-effective- Int. 2004;28(2):115-120.
outcomes, and health. Where further primary com- 6. Amputee Coalition of America. Prosthetic cov- ness studies. Med Care. 2003;41(1):32-44. 26. Selles RW, Janssens PJ, Jongenengel CD,
parative economic analyses of TTA prosthetic care are erage: saving money and saving lives. Manassas 16. Langer A. A framework for assessing Health Bussmann JB. A randomized controlled trial
needed, analyses of narrative economic reports rela- (VA): Amputee Coalition of America; [Accessed Economic Evaluation (HEE) quality appraisal comparing functional outcome and cost effi-
tive to TTA care may be sufficient to warrant further 2015 Dec 15]. http:// www.hangerclinic.com/ instruments. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:253. ciency of a total surface-bearing socket versus a
review. Finally, guidance from the profession may be new-patient/Documents/ prosthetic-coverage- 17. Spiegel BM, Targownik LE, Kanwal F, DeRosa V., conventional patellar tendon-bearing socket in
useful in devising a strategy for how to assure eco- saving-lives.pdf. Dulai GS, Gralnek, IM, Chiou, CF. The quality transtibial amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.
nomic analyses are a routine element of prosthetic 7. Gailey R, Allen K, Castles J, Kucharik J, Roeder of published health economic analyses in diges- 2005;86(1):154-161; quiz 180.
science in the future. tive diseases: a systematic review and quantitative 27. Normann E, Olsson A, Brodtkorb TH. Modu-
M. Review of secondary physical conditions appraisal. Gastroenterol. 2004;127(2):403-411. lar socket system versus traditionally laminated
associated with lower-limb amputation and 18. Walker DG, Wilson RF, Sharma R, Bridges J, socket: a cost analysis. Prosthet Orthot Int.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS long-term prosthesis use. J Rehabil Res Dev.
2011;35(1):76-80.
Contents of this manuscript represent the opin- 2008;45(1):15-29. Niessen L, Bass EB, Frick K. Best practices for 28. Webster JB, Poorman CE, Cifu DX. Guest edito-
conducting economic evaluations in health care:
ions of the authors and not necessarily those of the 8. Penn-Barwell JG. Outcomes in lower limb ampu- a systematic review of quality assessment tools. rial: Department of Veterans Affairs amputations
U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of the tation following trauma: a systematic review and Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research system of care: 5 years of accomplishments and
Army, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, or any meta-analysis. Injury. 2011;42(12):1474-1479. and Quality (US); 2012. outcomes. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2014;51(4):vii-xvi.
academic or health care institution. Authors declare 9. Bragaru M, Dekker R, Geertzen JH, Dijkstra PU. 19. Peterson LE, Goodman C, Karnes EK, Chen CJ, 29. MacKenzie EJ, Bosse MJ, Pollak AN, Webb LX,
no conflicts of interest. This project was funded by the Amputees and sports: a systematic review. Sports Schwartz JA. Assessment of the quality of cost Swiontkowski MF, Kellam JF, Smith DG, Sanders
Med. 2011;41(9):721-740. analysis literature in physical therapy. Phys Ther. RW, Jones AL, Starr AJ, McAndrew MP, Patterson
10. Webster JB, Hakimi KN, Williams RM, Turner 2009;89(8):733-755. BM, Burgess AR, Castillo RC. Long-term per-