Comparative Evaluation of Quality of Life in Patients Using Laminated and Molded Transtibial Prostheses
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Transtibial amputation substantially affects physical function, pain, emotional wellbeing, social participation, and general health perception. Prosthetic rehabilitation is central to recovery, yet comparative evidence regarding the effect of laminated and molded transtibial prostheses on quality of life remains limited. Objective: To evaluate and compare quality of life among patients using laminated and molded transtibial prostheses. Methods: A pretest-posttest comparative interventional study was conducted at the Institute of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Dow University of Health Sciences. Twenty male patients aged 20-60 years with transtibial amputation were recruited through convenience sampling and allocated into two groups: laminated prosthesis (n=10) and molded prosthesis (n=10). Quality of life was assessed before prosthetic fitting and again after six weeks using the SF-36 questionnaire. Data were analyzed in SPSS version 20 using descriptive statistics and t-tests, with p<0.05 considered statistically significant. Results: Significant pretest-posttest improvement was observed in all eight quality-of-life domains, including limitation of activities (p=0.001), social activities (p<0.001), energy (p=0.001), emotion (p<0.001), role limitation due to physical health (p<0.001), role limitation due to emotional health (p<0.001), pain (p<0.001), and general health (p<0.001). Between-group comparison showed significant differences only for limitation of activities (p=0.002) and social activities (p=0.010), while the total quality-of-life score did not differ significantly between groups (92.30 ± 8.72 vs 97.00 ± 3.94; p=0.138). Conclusion: Both laminated and molded transtibial prostheses were associated with significant improvement in quality of life after rehabilitation, with no statistically significant difference in overall post-intervention quality-of-life score between groups.
Article Details
Issue
Section

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.