Psychosocial Factors Influence Physical Activity after Dysvascular Amputation: A Convergent Mixed‐Methods Study. Issue 7 (16th September 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Miller, Matthew J.; Morris, Megan A.; Magnusson, Dawn M.; Putnam, Kelly; Cook, Paul F.; Schenkman, Margaret L.; Christiansen, Cory L.
• Is Part Of: PM&R. Volume 13:Issue 7(2021)
• Page Start: 737
• Page End: 745
• Publication Date: 2020-09-16
• Subjects: Medical rehabilitation -- Periodicals; Physical therapy -- Periodicals; Physical Therapy Modalities -- Periodicals; 615.5
• DOI: 10.1002/pmrj.12466
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1934-1482

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Physical function is a common target of rehabilitation intervention to improve disability and physical activity after dysvascular lower‐limb amputation (LLA); yet, the influence of psychosocial factors on physical activity is unclear. Objective: To identify psychosocial factors with potential to influence clinically relevant measures of physical activity, physical function, and disability in light of participants' narratives. Design: Convergent mixed‐methods. Setting: General community. Participants: Twenty participants with dysvascular LLA were enrolled if their most recent LLA was at least 1 year prior, they were ambulating independently with a prosthesis, and were between 45 and 88 years old. Intervention: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Quantitative data included physical activity (activPAL; steps/d), physical function (Timed Up‐and‐Go; TUG), and disability (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0; WHODAS 2.0). Qualitative data were collected via semistructured interviews. Results: Higher steps/d was moderately correlated with better TUG time (r = −.58, P < .01), but was not correlated with WHODAS 2.0 score (r = −0.18; P > .10). Qualitative analysis of interviews, using an inductive, team‐based, phenomenological approach, identified four themes: (1) perceptions of their prosthesis, (2) fear during mobility, (3) influence of LLA on life activities, and (4) positive outlook within social interactions. Mixed‐methods analysis used an iterative approach to interpret and describe how psychosocial factors influence physical activity in four exemplar cases. Conclusions: Physical activity in people with dysvascular LLA results from an interaction among perceptions of their prosthesis, fear during mobility, influence of LLA on life activities, and positive outlook within social interactions. The overlapping nature of these themes suggests that interventions targeting psychosocial factors may be associated with improved physical activity, physical function, and subsequent disability after dysvascular LLA.