JMERC
Owner
Janbazan Medical and Engineering Research Center (JMERC) is the owner of IJWPH.
0.4
Cite Score
SJR: 0.114 / SNIP: 0.090
Volume 10, Issue 2 (2018)
Iran J War Public Health 2018, 10(2): 75-83 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2017/08/23 | Accepted: 2017/12/30 | Published: 2018/04/23
Received: 2017/08/23 | Accepted: 2017/12/30 | Published: 2018/04/23
How to cite this article
Hoda M, Allami M, Asgari M. Evaluation of Users’ Satisfaction with Prosthesis and Prosthetic Services in Tehran. Iran J War Public Health 2018; 10 (2) :75-83
URL: http://ijwph.ir/article-1-712-en.html
URL: http://ijwph.ir/article-1-712-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
1- Janbazan Medical and Engineering Research Center (JMERC), Tehran, Iran , m.s_hoda@yahoo.com
2- Janbazan Medical and Engineering Research Center (JMERC), Tehran, Iran
2- Janbazan Medical and Engineering Research Center (JMERC), Tehran, Iran
Abstract (4644 Views)
Aims: By assessing the users’ satisfaction with prosthesis and prosthetic services, it is possible to modify the service providing structure and increase satisfaction with the delivery of services. The aim of this study was to evaluate the users’ satisfaction with prosthesis and prosthetic services in Tehran.
Instrument and materials: In this descriptive study with scrolling method, 388 users referred to Method Co. in Tehran, including those who received prosthesis and used the prosthetic services, were selected by census sampling method from the beginning of December 2014 to the end of January 2015. To assess the users’ satisfaction with prosthesis and its services, the standard Orthotics Prosthetics Users Survey (OPUS) and telephone interview technique were used. The data were analyzed by SPSS 23 software, using Pearson correlation, ANOVA, t-test, independent sample t-test, and Scheffe's post hoc test.
Findings: The satisfaction level with device was 45.5% and the satisfaction level with service was 66.2%. The satisfaction with device was assessed at a low level and the satisfaction with services was assessed at a high level. The highest level of satisfaction with device and services was in the illiterate group. Satisfaction with services among 5 groups showed a significant difference (p=0.001).
Conclusion: Users’ satisfaction with prosthetic services is more than their satisfaction with prosthesis. Users are not highly satisfied with the device (prosthesis), while their satisfaction level is relatively high with services that relates to human performance engaged in communication and customer-oriented principles. The higher the education levels of the users, the lower the levels of satisfaction with the device.
Keywords:
English Expanded Abstract [HTML 24 KB] (80 Download)
References
1. 1- McFarlane DA. Social communication in a technology-driven society: A philosophical exploration of factor-impacts and consequences. Am Commun J. 2010;12(1):1-14.
2. Shahryar Sh. Health and rehabilitation guideline in lower limb amputation. Tehran: Janbazan Medical & Engineering Research Center; 2009. [Persian]
3. Ebrahimzadeh MH, Hariri S. Long-term outcomes of unilateral transtibial amputations. Mil Med. 2009;174(6):593-7. [DOI:10.7205/MILMED-D-02-8907]
4. Stillerman J. The sociology of consumption: A global approach. Heydarzadeh K, Mohaimeni M, translator. Tehran: Mehrban Nashr; 2017. [Persian]
5. Nouraei MH, Javdan M, Nouraei F, Mohebbi Dehnavi A, Safdari F. Study of stump problems of lower limb amputation in war casualties. Iran J Orthop Surg. 2014;12(2):47-51. [Persian]
6. Yahyaei Ileei A. Principles of Customer Orientation (Banking, Hospitality & Automotive). Tehran: Jajarmi; 2009. [Persian]
7. Inglehart R. Modernization, cultural change, and democracy: The human development sequence. New York : Cambridge University Press; 2005. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511790881]
8. Krauser P. The research administrator as servant-leader. J Res Adm. 2003;34(1):14.
9. Jiang L, Gan Ch, Kao B, Zhang Y, Zhang H, Cai L. Consumer satisfaction with public health care in China. J Soc Sci. 2009;5(3):223-35. [DOI:10.3844/jssp.2009.223.235]
10. Nielsen CC, Psonak RA, Kalter TL. Factors Affecting the Use of Prosthetic Services. J Prosthet Orth. 1989;1(4):242-9. [DOI:10.1097/00008526-198907000-00008]
11. Pasquina PF, Bryant PR, Huang ME, Roberts TL, Nelson VS, Flood KM. Advances in amputee care. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87(3):34-43. [DOI:10.1016/j.apmr.2005.11.026]
12. Heinemann AW, Gershon R, Fisher WP Jr. Development and application of the orthotics and prosthetics user survey: Applications and opportunities for health care quality improvement. J Prosthet Orthot. 2006;18(6):P80-5. [DOI:10.1097/00008526-200601001-00009]
13. Hadadi M, Ghoseiri K, Fardipour S, Kashani RV, Asadi F, Asghari A. The Persian version of satisfaction assessment module of Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey. Disabil Health J. 2016;9(1):90-9. [DOI:10.1016/j.dhjo.2015.08.010]
14. Azarmi S, Farsi Z, Sajadi SA. The role of nurse in adaptation of veterans with amputee. Military Caring Sciences. 2015;2(1):48-54. [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.mcs.2.1.48]
15. Schoppen T, Boonstra A, Groothoff JW, de Vries J, Göeken LN, Eisma WH. Physical, mental, and social predictors of functional outcome in unilateral lower-limb amputees. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84(6):803-11. [DOI:10.1016/S0003-9993(02)04952-3]
16. Dillingham TR, Pezzin LE, MacKenzie EJ, Burgess AR. Use and satisfaction with prosthetic devices among persons with trauma-related amputations: A long-term outcome study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2001;80(8):563-71. [DOI:10.1097/00002060-200108000-00003]
17. Beekman CE, Axtell LA. Prosthetic use in elderly patients with dysvascular above-knee and through-knee amputations. Phys ther. 1987;67(10):1510-6. [DOI:10.1093/ptj/67.10.1510]
18. Gauthier-Gagnon C, Grisé MC, Potvin D. Enabling factors related to prosthetic use by people with transtibial and transfemoral amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80(6):706-13. [DOI:10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90177-6]
19. Dolezal JM, Vernick SH, Khan N, Lutz D, Tyndall C. Factors associated with use and nonuse of an AK prosthesis in a rural, southern, geriatric population. Int J Rehabil Health. 1998;4(4):245-51. [DOI:10.1023/A:1022918913632]
20. Burger H, Marinček Č. Upper limb prosthetic use in Slovenia. Prosthet Orthotics Int. 1994;18(1):25-33.
21. Kyberd PJ, Beard DJ, Davey JJ, Morrison DJ. A Survey of upper-limb prosthesis users in Oxfordshire. J Prosthet Orthot. 1998;10(4):84-91. [DOI:10.1097/00008526-199801040-00004]
22. Hagberg K, Brånemark R. Consequences of non-vascular trans-femoral amputation: A survey of quality of life, prosthetic use and problems. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2001;25(3):186-94. [DOI:10.1080/03093640108726601]
23. Ghoseiri K, Bahramian H. User satisfaction with orthotic and prosthetic devices and services of a single clinic. Disabil Rehabil. 2012;34(15):1328-32. [DOI:10.3109/09638288.2011.641663]
24. Berke GM, Fergason J, Milani JR, Hattingh J, McDowell M, Nguyen V, et al. Comparison of satisfaction with current prosthetic care in veterans and servicemembers from Vietnam and OIF/OEF conflicts with major traumatic limb loss. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2010;47(4):361-71. [DOI:10.1682/JRRD.2009.12.0193]
25. Magnusson L, Ahlström G, Ramstrand N, Fransson EI. Malawian prosthetic and orthotic users' mobility and satisfaction with their lower limb assistive device. J Rehabil Med. 2013;45(4):385-91. [DOI:10.2340/16501977-1117]
26. Sherman RA. Utilization of prostheses among US veterans with traumatic amputation: A pilot survey. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1999;36(2):100-8.
27. Bosmans J, Geertzen J, Dijkstra PU. Consumer satisfaction with the services of prosthetics and orthotics facilities. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2009;33(1):69-77. [DOI:10.1080/03093640802403803]
28. Routhier F, Vincent C, Morissette MJ, Desaulniers L. Clinical results of an investigation of paediatric upper limb myoelectric prosthesis fitting at the Quebec Rehabilitation Institute. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2001;25(2):119-31. [DOI:10.1080/03093640108726585]
29. Sin SW, Chow DH, Cheng JC. Significance of non-level walking on transtibial prosthesis fitting with particular reference to the effects of anterior-posterior alignment. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001;38(1):1-6.
30. Yang L, Solomonidis S, Spence WD, Paul JP. The influence of limb alignment on the gait of above-knee amputees. J Biomech. 1991;24(11):981-97. [DOI:10.1016/0021-9290(91)90016-G]
31. Pakjouei S, Vameghi R, Dejman M, Vameghi M, Kamali M. Satisfaction and related factors among the service users of private rehabilitation centers. Iran Rehabil J. 2014;12(4):35-42. [Persian]
32. Raichle KA, Hanley MA, Molton I, Kadel NJ, Campbell K, Phelps E, et al. Prosthesis use in persons with lower-and upper-limb amputation. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008;45(7):961-72. [DOI:10.1682/JRRD.2007.09.0151]
33. Engdahl SM, Christie BP, Kelly B, Davis A, Chestek CA, Gates DH. Surveying the interest of individuals with upper limb loss in novel prosthetic control techniques. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2015;12:53. [DOI:10.1186/s12984-015-0044-2]
Send email to the article author