Microprocessor Knee Versus Non-Microprocessor Knee for Backup Device in Lower Limb Prostheses: A Qualitative Study
Abstract: Current policy in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) and Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) is to provide individuals who require a prosthesis for a knee disarticulation (KD) or transfemoral (TF)-level amputation a microprocessor knee (MPK) unit for daily use and a non-microprocessor knee unit (N-MPK) as a backup prosthesis. Given the known functional differences between these two types of prosthetic knee units, the purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of user device preference and the impact of switching between the MPK and N-MPK. Four currently serving CAF members and two Veterans with unilateral TF or KD amputation participated in semi-structured interviews. Qualitative content analysis identified key themes reflecting their experiences using prostheses. Seven major categories emerged that helped shape prosthesis preferences: functionality, physical aspects, mental aspects, activity, maintenance, safety, and health-related quality of life. The MPK was superior in all categories, resulting in considerably fewer falls and improved cognitive and physical performance. The four participants who had an N-MPK backup did not use this device and instead received a loaner MPK from their prosthetist when required. For individuals who do not have ready access to their prosthetist to obtain a loaner knee unit, consideration should be given for a backup prosthesis with the same MPK unit as their daily-use prosthesis, as participants identify significant issues when trying to function with an N-MPK unit. Individuals with ready access to a loaner knee unit through their prosthetist may not require a backup prosthesis.
Abstract: INTRODUCTION: Substance use disorders (SUDs) are an ongoing public health crisis in the United States. A large body of research indicates an urgent need for increased training in SUD research and treatment for trainees in mental health service disciplines. The VA Health Care System is well positioned, as the largest trainer and employer of health service psychologists and other mental health professionals, to address the SUD training gap and serve as a leader in training the upcoming health care workforce. METHOD: To this end, we conducted two pilot studies to (1) examine the feasibility of implementing supplemental SUD training for VA health service trainees, among current VA mental health service providers in psychology, social work, and medical care (N = 37) and (2) the efficacy of a single 2-hour interdisciplinary SUD training seminar for VA health service trainees in mental health (N = 13). The training seminar consisted of several components including lecture, facilitated discussion, and role play, aimed at increasing trainee self-efficacy in assessing and diagnosing SUDs. RESULTS: Findings suggest that current providers are supportive of supplemental SUD training for VA trainees and believe that such training is beneficial for those wishing to pursue a career within the VA Health Care System. Additionally, results suggest that a single session didactic seminar improved trainees' self-reported efficacy in the assessment and referral of veterans diagnosed with SUDs. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the above studies support additional feasibility investigations that would pave the way for successful implementation of widespread SUD training programs across the VA Health Care System and beyond. Successful implementation would then serve to reduce the increasingly critical SUD provider shortage, thus leading to significant public health gains.