SYSTEMATIC REVIEW   Free access

European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2022 June;58(3):452-61

DOI: 10.23736/S1973-9087.22.07238-0

Copyright © 2022 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Impact of microprocessor prosthetic knee on mobility and quality of life in patients with lower limb amputation: a systematic review of the literature

Aurore THIBAUT ^{1, 2}, Charlotte BEAUDART ^{1, 3}, Benoit MAERTENS DE NOORDHOUT ¹, Sybille GEERS ⁴, Jean-François KAUX ¹, Doriane PELZER ¹ ✉

¹ CNRF Department of Physical Medicine and Sports Traumatology, University Hospital of Liege, Liege, Belgium; ² Coma Science Group, GIGA-Consciousness, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; ³ World Health Organization Collaborating Center for Public Health Aspects of Musculoskeletal Health and Ageing, Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; ⁴ Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium

INTRODUCTION: Advanced technologies have made available the development of microprocessor prosthetic knee (MPK) to improve autonomy of patients with lower limb amputation. In the present systematic review, we aimed to evaluate the impact of the use of all types of MPK on patients’ functional status and quality of life.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We conducted this review according to the PRISMA Guidelines on Medline (via Ovid), Scopus and SportDiscuss. All identified articles were screened for their eligibility by two reviewers using Covidence software. The Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB) or the NIH Quality Assessment Tool were used to assess the quality of the studies.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Eighteen articles were included in the present review (7 randomized controlled trials - RCT), 6 cross-sectional and 5 follow-up studies). Number of participants included varied from 20 to 602, protocols’ length varied from a single session to 12 weeks of use of MPK. Taken together, MPK users compared to NMPK users tend to present better functional status and mobility. Quality of life was also positively impacted in MPK users. On the other hand, the superiority of more advanced MPKs such as the Genium^® is less clear, especially given the improvements over time of other MPKs such as the C-leg^® and the Rheo knee^®.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results, while it is clear that MPKs outperform NMPKs both for functional status and quality of life, additional benefits of one MPK over another is less clear. Future studies are needed to clarify these aspects.

KEY WORDS: Microcomputers; Knee prosthesis; Amputation; Gait; Functional status