The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Upper-Limb Prosthetics: Critical Factors in Device Abandonment
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the roles of predisposing characteristics, established need, and enabling resources in upper-limb prosthesis use and abandonment. DESIGN: A self-administered, anonymous survey was designed to explore these factors. The questionnaire was available online and in paper format and was distributed through healthcare providers, community support groups, and one prosthesis manufacturer. Two hundred forty-two participants of all ages and levels of upper-limb absence completed the survey. RESULTS: Of participants, 20% had abandoned prosthesis use. Predisposing factors, namely, origin of limb absence, gender, bilateral limb absence, and, most importantly, level of limb absence, proved influential in the decision not to wear prostheses. Enabling resources such as the availability of health care, cost, and quality of training did not weigh heavily on prosthesis rejection, with the exception of the fitting time frame and the involvement of clients in the prosthesis selection. Conversely, the state of available technology was a highly censured factor in abandonment, specifically in the areas of comfort and function. Perceived need emerged as a predominant factor in prosthesis use. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should focus on continued development of more comfortable and functional prostheses, particularly for individuals with high-level or bilateral limb absence. Improved follow-up, repair, and information services, together with active involvement of clients in the selection of prostheses meeting their specific goals and needs, is recommended.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Revisiting the Behavioral Model and Access to Medical Care: Does it Matter?
Andersen, R. M. (1995) · Journal of Health and Social Behavior · doi:10.2307/2137284 · Cited by 9,831
Internet Versus Mailed Questionnaires: A Randomized Comparison
Ritter, P., Lorig, K., Laurent, D., & Matthews, K. (2004) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.6.3.e29 · Cited by 427 · cited 1×
“) have been demonstrated.(22,25) However, it is important to recognize the possible sampling biases inherent to the results presented herein.”
Background
Cited by
George, J. A., Kluger, D. T., Davis, T. S., Wendelken, S. M., Okorokova, E. V., He, Q., Duncan, C. C., Hutchinson, D. T., Thumser, Z. C., Beckler, D. T., et al. (2019) · Science Robotics · doi:10.1126/scirobotics.aax2352 · Cited by 388
Global prevalence of traumatic non-fatal limb amputation
McDonald, C. L., Westcott-McCoy, S., Weaver, M. R., Haagsma, J., & Kartin, D. (2021) · Prosthetics & Orthotics International · doi:10.1177/0309364620972258 · Cited by 357
Advanced Upper Limb Prosthetic Devices: Implications for Upper Limb Prosthetic Rehabilitation
Resnik, L., Meucci, M. R., Lieberman-Klinger, S., Fantini, C., Kelty, D. L., Disla, R., & Sasson, N. (2012) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2011.11.010 · Cited by 280
Differences in myoelectric and body-powered upper-limb prostheses: systematic literature review
Carey, S. L., Lura, D. J., Highsmith, M. J., CP, & FAAOP (2015) · Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development · doi:10.1682/jrrd.2014.08.0192 · Cited by 227
A Review of Non-Invasive Sensory Feedback Methods for Transradial Prosthetic Hands
Stephens-Fripp, B., Alici, G., & Mutlu, R. (2018) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2018.2791583 · Cited by 210
Metadata
- Authors
- Biddiss, E., & Chau, T.
- Venue
- American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
- Published
- 2007-12
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 977-987
- ISSN
- 0894-9115 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2154683138
- Cited by
- 645
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 3.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Upper-Limb Prosthetics: Critical Factors in Device Abandonment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/phm.0b013e3181587f6c
- The paper
- Biddiss, E., & Chau, T. (2007). Upper-Limb Prosthetics: Critical Factors in Device Abandonment. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1097/phm.0b013e3181587f6c
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.