ORIGINAL RESEARCH| Volume 103, ISSUE 9, P1786-1797, September 2022

Download started.


Use of Standardized Outcome Measures for People With Lower Limb Amputation: A Survey of Prosthetic Practitioners in the United States

Published:April 05, 2022DOI:



      To assess the clinical resources available for the assessment of health outcomes in people with lower limb amputation and to understand barriers and facilitators associated with use of standardized outcome measures in clinical practice.


      Cross-sectional survey.


      General community (online).


      A volunteer sample of prosthetic practitioners was recruited through national professional organizations. Eligible participants were practitioners certified by a professional prosthetics organization and currently practicing as a prosthetist, prosthetist-orthotist, or prosthetic assistant.


      Not applicable.

      Main Outcome Measures

      A custom-designed online survey on clinical use of patient-reported and performance-based standardized outcome measures to assess patients with lower limb amputation.


      A total of 375 participants completed the survey. Most participants (79%) reported that they are encouraged or required to administer standardized outcome measures in their clinic or facility. Most participants reported that use of patient-reported and performance-based outcome measures are within their scope of practice (88%) and that they have the knowledge required for outcomes measurement (84%). Few participants agreed that outcomes measurement is standardized across the profession (30%). Most participants had access to small spaces and equipment for outcomes measurement, such as short hallways (65%-94%), stairs (69%), and tablets with wireless internet connection (83%). Most participants reported that they would be willing to spend between 5 (36% of participants) and 10 (43% of participants) minutes on self-reported surveys, and between 10 (41% of participants) and 20 (28% of participants) minutes on performance-based tests.


      Outcomes measurement is encouraged or expected in contemporary prosthetic practice. Strategies to improve standardization and efficiency of administration are needed to facilitate routine use of outcome measures in clinical care.


      List of abbreviations:

      ABC (American Board of Certification in Prosthetics, Orthotics, and Pedorthics), AMP (Amputee Mobility Predictor), BOC (Board of Certification/Accreditation), CHAMP (Comprehensive High-Level Activity Mobility Predictor), LLPR (Limb Loss and Preservation Registry), PEQ (Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire), PLUS-M (Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility), TUG (Timed Up-and-Go), 2MWT (2-minute walk test)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Sions JM
        • Beisheim EH
        • Seth M.
        Selecting, administering, and interpreting outcome measures among adults with lower-limb loss: an update for clinicians.
        Curr Phys Med Rehabil Rep. 2020; 8: 92-109
        • Condie E
        • Scott H
        • Treweek S.
        Lower limb prosthetic outcome measures: a review of the literature 1995 to 2005.
        J Prosthet Orthot. 2006; 18: 13-45
        • Heinemann AW
        • Connelly L
        • Ehrlich-Jones L
        • Fatone S.
        Outcome instruments for prosthetics: clinical applications.
        Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2014; 25: 179-198
        • Portney LG.
        Foundations of clinical research: applications to evidence-based practice.
        4th ed. F.A. Davis Company, Philadelphia, PA2020
        • Finch E
        • Brooks D
        • Stratford PW
        • Mayo NE.
        Physical rehabilitation outcome measures: a guide to enhanced clinical decision making.
        2nd ed. BC Decker Inc, Hamilton, Ontario2002
        • Patla AE
        • Shumway-Cook A.
        Dimensions of mobility: defining the complexity and difficulty associated with community mobility.
        J Aging Phys Act. 1999; 7: 7-19
        • Hafner BJ
        • Gaunaurd IA
        • Morgan SJ
        • Amtmann D
        • Salem R
        • Gailey RS.
        Construct validity of the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility (PLUS-M) in adults with lower limb amputation.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017; 98: 277-285
        • Gailey RS
        • Roach KE
        • Applegate EB
        • et al.
        The Amputee Mobility Predictor: an instrument to assess determinants of the lower-limb amputee's ability to ambulate.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002; 83: 613-627
        • Legro MW
        • Reiber GD
        • Smith DG
        • del Aguila M
        • Larsen J
        • Boone D.
        Prosthesis evaluation questionnaire for persons with lower limb amputations: assessing prosthesis-related quality of life.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998; 79: 931-938
        • Hafner BJ
        • Morgan SJ
        • Askew RL
        • Salem R.
        Psychometric evaluation of self-report outcome measures for prosthetic applications.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2016; 53: 797-812
        • Amtmann D
        • Morgan SJ
        • Kim J
        • Hafner BJ.
        Health-related profiles of people with lower limb loss.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015; 96: 1474-1483
        • Gailey RS
        • Scoville C
        • Gaunaurd IA
        • et al.
        Construct validity of Comprehensive High-Level Activity Mobility Predictor (CHAMP) for male servicemembers with traumatic lower-limb loss.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013; 50: 919-930
        • Sawers A
        • Kim J
        • Balkman G
        • Hafner BJ.
        Interrater and test-retest reliability of performance-based clinical tests administered to established users of lower limb prostheses.
        Phys Ther. 2020; 100: 1206-1216
        • Cox PD
        • Frengopoulos CA
        • Hunter SW
        • Sealy CM
        • Deathe AB
        • Payne MWC.
        Impact of course configuration on 6-minute walk test performance of people with lower extremity amputations.
        Physiother Can. 2017; 69: 197-203
        • Gaunaurd I
        • Spaulding SE
        • Amtmann D
        • et al.
        Use of and confidence in administering outcome measures among clinical prosthetists: results from a national survey and mixed-methods training program.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2015; 39: 314-321
        • Hafner BJ
        • Spaulding SE
        • Salem R
        • Morgan SJ
        • Gaunaurd I
        • Gailey R.
        Prosthetists' perceptions and use of outcome measures in clinical practice: long-term effects of focused continuing education.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2017; 41: 266-273
        • Borrenpohl D
        • Kaluf B
        • Major MJ.
        Survey of U.S. practitioners on the validity of the Medicare Functional Classification Level system and utility of clinical outcome measures for aiding K-level assignment.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2016; 97: 1053-1063
        • Jette DU
        • Halbert J
        • Iverson C
        • Miceli E
        • Shah P.
        Use of standardized outcome measures in physical therapist practice: perceptions and applications.
        Phys Ther. 2009; 89: 125-135
        • Abrams D
        • Davidson M
        • Harrick J
        • Harcourt P
        • Zylinski M
        • Clancy J.
        Monitoring the change: current trends in outcome measure usage in physiotherapy.
        Man Ther. 2006; 11: 46-53
        • Wedge FM
        • Braswell-Christy J
        • Brown CJ
        • Foley KT
        • Graham C
        • Shaw S.
        Factors influencing the use of outcome measures in physical therapy practice.
        Physiother Theory Pract. 2012; 28: 119-133
        • Swinkels RA
        • van Peppen RP
        • Wittink H
        • Custers JW
        • Beurskens AJ.
        Current use and barriers and facilitators for implementation of standardised measures in physical therapy in the Netherlands.
        BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011; 12: 106
        • Stapleton T
        • McBrearty C.
        Use of standardised assessments and outcome measures among a sample of Irish occupational therapists working with adults with physical disabilities.
        Br J Occup Ther. 2009; 72: 55-64
        • Morgan SJ
        • Balkman GS
        • Gaunaurd IA
        • Kristal A
        • Amtmann D
        • Hafner BJ.
        Clinical resources for assessing mobility of people with lower-limb amputation: interviews with rehabilitation clinicians.
        J Prosthet Orthot. 2022; 34: 69-78
      1. Survey Monkey. Survey sample size calculator. Available at: Accessed July 1, 2020.

        • Adam A.
        Sample size determination in survey research.
        J Sci Res Rep. 2020; 26: 90-97
        • Harris PA
        • Taylor R
        • Thielke R
        • Payne J
        • Gonzalez N
        • Conde JG.
        Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support.
        J Biomed Inform. 2009; 42: 377-381
        • Harris PA
        • Taylor R
        • Minor BL
        • et al.
        The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners.
        J Biomed Inform. 2019; 95103208
      2. American Board for Certification in Orthotics Prosthetics and Pedorthics. Practice analysis of certified practitioners in the disciplines of orthotics and prosthetics. Alexandria, VA, 2015.

        • Powell LE
        • Myers AM.
        The Activities-Specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale.
        J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1995; 50a: M28-M34
        • Devlin M
        • Pauley T
        • Head K
        • Garfinkel S.
        Houghton Scale of prosthetic use in people with lower-extremity amputations: reliability, validity, and responsiveness to change.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004; 85: 1339-1344
        • Gallagher P
        • Maclachlan M.
        The Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales and quality of life in people with lower-limb amputation.
        Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004; 85: 730-736
        • Gauthier-Gagnon C
        • Grisé MC.
        The Locomotor Capabilities Index: content validity.
        J Rehabil Outcomes Meas. 1998; 2: 40-46
        • Podsiadlo D
        • Richardson S.
        The timed "Up & Go": a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons.
        J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991; 39: 142-148
        • Butland RJ
        • Pang J
        • Gross ER
        • Woodcock AA
        • Geddes DM.
        Two-, six-, and 12-minute walking tests in respiratory disease.
        Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1982; 284: 1607-1608
        • Gailey RS
        • Gaunaurd IA
        • Raya MA
        • et al.
        Development and reliability testing of the Comprehensive High-Level Activity Mobility Predictor (CHAMP) in male servicemembers with traumatic lower-limb loss.
        J Rehabil Res Dev. 2013; 50: 905-918
        • Shank C
        • Kristal A
        • Van Veld R
        • Applegate B
        • Gaunaurd I
        • Gailey R
        Variations in 2-minute walk test outcomes for people with lower limb amputation in the outpatient clinic and research setting.
        Prosthet Orthot Int. 2022; 46: 140-147
        • McMillan SS
        • King M
        • Tully MP.
        How to use the nominal group and Delphi techniques.
        Int J Clin Pharm. 2016; 38: 655-662
      3. Limb Loss and Preservation Registry. The Limb Loss and Preservation Registry (LLPR) 2020. Available at: Accessed December 14, 2021.

      4. Commission on Accreditation of Allied Health Education Programs (CAAHEP). Standards and guidelines for the accreditation of educational programs in orthotics and prosthetics. Seminole, FL, 2017.