What Matters Most: A Multi-Stakeholder Study of Outcome Domains in Lower-Limb Prosthesis Use
Abstract
Purpose Lower-limb prosthesis use involves interacting physical, psychosocial, and device-related outcomes that may not be fully represented by conventional clinical assessment. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a stakeholder-informed framework of outcome domains relevant to meaningful everyday prosthesis use. Materials and Methods A mixed-methods participatory design comprised synthesis of selected clinically relevant content from five established patient-reported outcome measures; semi-structured interviews and importance and actionability ratings with 18 contributors (12 prosthesis users, four clinicians, and two industrial partners); and integration of synthesis, qualitative, and rating findings. Interview records were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and ratings descriptively. Results The resulting framework comprised four interrelated domains: Mobility, Physical Function, Psychosocial Wellbeing, and Prosthesis Experience. Mobility showed the clearest convergence across stakeholder perspectives. Prosthesis users showed the largest importance–actionability gap for Prosthesis Experience (4.5 vs 3.0), whereas clinicians showed the largest gap for Psychosocial Wellbeing (5.0 vs 3.0). Interviews highlighted day-to-day variability and the influence of confidence, fatigue, comfort, environment, social context, and device usability. Conclusions Meaningful outcome assessment in prosthetic rehabilitation should extend beyond mobility alone to consider physical function, psychosocial wellbeing, and prosthesis experience within everyday contexts. The framework provides a stakeholder-informed foundation for multidimensional outcome assessment.
Related
- Case report: revision surgery for a fractured femoral stem using an ESOP prosthesis – analysis of the diagnostic work-up, treatment strategy, and long-term outcome
- Clinical laboratory diagnostic stewardship as boundary infrastructure: a multi-stakeholder qualitative study of digital public health governance in two Chinese regional referral hospitals
- Pet-inclusive housing as a social determinant of health: a multi-stakeholder qualitative study of rental policy and health equity
- From Evidence to Intervention: A Systematic, Multi-Stakeholder Approach to Developing and Prioritizing Diagnostic Excellence Interventions Across a 14-Site Hospital Medicine Collaborative
- Don't forget to safeguard the lungs during DCD multi-organ retrieval! Early in situ oxygenated preservation matters.
BibTeX
@misc{ahmed2026what,
title = {{What Matters Most: A Multi-Stakeholder Study of Outcome Domains in Lower-Limb Prosthesis Use}},
author = {M. E. Ahmed and S. Karlsson-Brown and P. Koufaki and M. Ahmadi and E. M. Mico-Amigo},
howpublished = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = aug,
doi = {10.64898/2026.08.31.26361544},
url = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.08.31.26361544v1},
note = {Public domain},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - What Matters Most: A Multi-Stakeholder Study of Outcome Domains in Lower-Limb Prosthesis Use
AU - M. E. Ahmed
AU - S. Karlsson-Brown
AU - P. Koufaki
AU - M. Ahmadi
AU - E. M. Mico-Amigo
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/08/31
PB - medRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.08.31.26361544
UR - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.08.31.26361544v1
AB - Purpose Lower-limb prosthesis use involves interacting physical, psychosocial, and device-related outcomes that may not be fully represented by conventional clinical assessment. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a stakeholder-informed framework of outcome domains relevant to meaningful everyday prosthesis use. Materials and Methods A mixed-methods participatory design comprised synthesis of selected clinically relevant content from five established patient-reported outcome measures; semi-structured interviews and importance and actionability ratings with 18 contributors (12 prosthesis users, four clinicians, and two industrial partners); and integration of synthesis, qualitative, and rating findings. Interview records were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis and ratings descriptively. Results The resulting framework comprised four interrelated domains: Mobility, Physical Function, Psychosocial Wellbeing, and Prosthesis Experience. Mobility showed the clearest convergence across stakeholder perspectives. Prosthesis users showed the largest importance–actionability gap for Prosthesis Experience (4.5 vs 3.0), whereas clinicians showed the largest gap for Psychosocial Wellbeing (5.0 vs 3.0). Interviews highlighted day-to-day variability and the influence of confidence, fatigue, comfort, environment, social context, and device usability. Conclusions Meaningful outcome assessment in prosthetic rehabilitation should extend beyond mobility alone to consider physical function, psychosocial wellbeing, and prosthesis experience within everyday contexts. The framework provides a stakeholder-informed foundation for multidimensional outcome assessment.
ER -