RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Identifying instruments to assess care quality for individuals with custom ankle foot orthoses
A scoping review
Fatone, S., Jerousek, S., Slater, B. C. S., Deutsch, A., LaVela, S. L., Peterson, M., Soltys, N. T., McPherson, V., & Heinemann, A. W. (2021). Identifying instruments to assess care quality for individuals with custom ankle foot orthoses: A scoping review. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 102(4), 709-734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2020.06.029
OBJECTIVES: We conducted 2 complementary scoping reviews to identify instruments that assess the experience and outcomes of custom ankle-foot orthosis (AFO) care in individuals with neurologic and traumatic conditions and to determine to what extent they might be psychometrically sound for AFO users. A stakeholder advisory committee considered to what extent the identified and psychometrically sound instruments might be feasible for use in developing quality measures for custom AFO users.
DATA SOURCES: Both scoping reviews were conducted using PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, and Cochrane Systematic Reviews. The following were used for the first scoping review only: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database.
STUDY SELECTION: The initial scoping review yielded 79 articles with 82 instruments, 16 of which were used in 4 or more studies. The second scoping review yielded 57 articles reporting psychometric properties.
DATA EXTRACTION: Psychometric properties for populations who use AFOs were summarized for 15 of the 16 instruments. The advisory committee eliminated 2 insrtruments, noted overlap between 4 instruments in terms of the constructs measured, and suggested 6 potential contemporary substitutes.
DATA SYNTHESIS: Most instruments assessed activity (specifically mobility) and pertained to the National Quality Forum domain of "Health-Related Quality of Life." The 10-meter walk test, 6-minute walk test, Berg Balance Scale, Timed Up and Go, and Rivermead Mobility Index were reported to have adequate reliability and validity, and were considered feasible for administration in a clinical setting.
CONCLUSIONS: Complementary scoping reviews demonstrated that some instruments with reasonable psychometric properties are available that are feasible to use in developing quality measures for custom AFO care. However, experience of care instruments suitable for this population were not identified but are needed for a comprehensive evaluation of care quality for AFO users.
