Publication

Measurement properties and usability of non-contact scanners for measuring transtibial residual limb volume

Kofman, R., Beekman, A. M., Emmelot, C. H., Geertzen, J. H. B. & Dijkstra, P. U., Jun-2018, In : Prosthetics and Orthotics International. 42, 3, p. 280-287 8 p.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Copy link to clipboard

Documents

  • Measurement properties and usability of non-contact scanners for measuring transtibial residual limb volume

    Final publisher's version, 382 KB, PDF document

DOI

BACKGROUND: Non-contact scanners may have potential for measurement of residual limb volume. Different non-contact scanners have been introduced during the last decades. Reliability and usability (practicality and user friendliness) should be assessed before introducing these systems in clinical practice.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the measurement properties and usability of four non-contact scanners (TT Design, Omega Scanner, BioSculptor Bioscanner, and Rodin4D Scanner).

STUDY DESIGN: Quasi experimental.

METHODS: Nine (geometric and residual limb) models were measured on two occasions, each consisting of two sessions, thus in total 4 sessions. In each session, four observers used the four systems for volume measurement. Mean for each model, repeatability coefficients for each system, variance components, and their two-way interactions of measurement conditions were calculated. User satisfaction was evaluated with the Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire.

RESULTS: Systematic differences between the systems were found in volume measurements. Most of the variances were explained by the model (97%), while error variance was 3%. Measurement system and the interaction between system and model explained 44% of the error variance. Repeatability coefficient of the systems ranged from 0.101 (Omega Scanner) to 0.131 L (Rodin4D). Differences in Post-Study System Usability Questionnaire scores between the systems were small and not significant.

CONCLUSION: The systems were reliable in determining residual limb volume. Measurement systems and the interaction between system and residual limb model explained most of the error variances. The differences in repeatability coefficient and usability between the four CAD/CAM systems were small. Clinical relevance If accurate measurements of residual limb volume are required (in case of research), modern non-contact scanners should be taken in consideration nowadays.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)280-287
Number of pages8
JournalProsthetics and Orthotics International
Volume42
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Jun-2018

    Keywords

  • Journal Article

ID: 54601486