475 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32437692)
1. Function and Quality of Life of Unilateral Major Upper Limb Amputees: Effect of Prosthesis Use and Type.
Resnik L; Borgia M; Clark M
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2020 Aug; 101(8):1396-1406. PubMed ID: 32437692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. A National Survey of Prosthesis Use in Veterans with Major Upper Limb Amputation: Comparisons by Gender.
Resnik LJ; Borgia ML; Clark MA
PM R; 2020 Nov; 12(11):1086-1098. PubMed ID: 32103626
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Dexterity, activity performance, disability, quality of life, and independence in upper limb Veteran prosthesis users: a normative study.
Resnik L; Borgia M; Cancio J; Heckman J; Highsmith J; Levy C; Phillips S; Webster J
Disabil Rehabil; 2022 Jun; 44(11):2470-2481. PubMed ID: 33073621
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Frequency, severity, and implications of shoulder pain in people with major upper limb amputation who use prostheses: Results of a National Study.
Webster JB; Webster N; Borgia M; Resnik L
PM R; 2022 Aug; 14(8):901-912. PubMed ID: 34219397
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Brief activity performance measure for upper limb amputees: BAM-ULA.
Resnik L; Borgia M; Acluche F
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2018 Feb; 42(1):75-83. PubMed ID: 28091278
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A national study of Veterans with major upper limb amputation: Survey methods, participants, and summary findings.
Resnik L; Ekerholm S; Borgia M; Clark MA
PLoS One; 2019; 14(3):e0213578. PubMed ID: 30870496
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Prosthesis satisfaction in a national sample of Veterans with upper limb amputation.
Resnik L; Borgia M; Heinemann AW; Clark MA
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2020 Apr; 44(2):81-91. PubMed ID: 31960734
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of the QuickDASH in Patients With Upper Limb Amputation.
Resnik L; Borgia M
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2015 Sep; 96(9):1676-83. PubMed ID: 25912667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Function, quality of life, and community integration of DEKA Arm users after discharge from prosthetic training: Impact of home use experience.
Resnik L; Acluche F; Borgia M; Cancio J; Latlief G; Sasson N
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2018 Dec; 42(6):571-582. PubMed ID: 29779455
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. A comparison of compensatory movements between body-powered and myoelectric prosthesis users during activities of daily living.
Engdahl SM; Lee C; Gates DH
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2022 Jul; 97():105713. PubMed ID: 35809535
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Assessing physical function in adult acquired major upper-limb amputees by combining the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Outcome Questionnaire and clinical examination.
Ostlie K; Franklin RJ; Skjeldal OH; Skrondal A; Magnus P
Arch Phys Med Rehabil; 2011 Oct; 92(10):1636-45. PubMed ID: 21872841
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A comparison of the University of New Brunswick Test of Prosthetic Function and the Assessment of Capacity for Myoelectric Control.
Burger H; Brezovar D; Vidmar G
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med; 2014 Aug; 50(4):433-8. PubMed ID: 24476807
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Prosthesis use in adult acquired major upper-limb amputees: patterns of wear, prosthetic skills and the actual use of prostheses in activities of daily life.
Østlie K; Lesjø IM; Franklin RJ; Garfelt B; Skjeldal OH; Magnus P
Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol; 2012 Nov; 7(6):479-93. PubMed ID: 22315926
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Patient Perspectives on Osseointegration: A National Survey of Veterans with Upper Limb Amputation.
Resnik L; Benz H; Borgia M; Clark MA
PM R; 2019 Dec; 11(12):1261-1271. PubMed ID: 30784201
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Evaluation of disabilities and activities of daily living of war-related bilateral lower extremity amputees.
Ebrahimzadeh MH; Moradi A; Bozorgnia S; Hallaj-Moghaddam M
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2016 Feb; 40(1):51-7. PubMed ID: 25249384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Consumer concerns and the functional value of prostheses to upper limb amputees.
Kejlaa GH
Prosthet Orthot Int; 1993 Dec; 17(3):157-63. PubMed ID: 8134275
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Responsiveness of outcome measures for upper limb prosthetic rehabilitation.
Resnik L; Borgia M
Prosthet Orthot Int; 2016 Feb; 40(1):96-108. PubMed ID: 25336051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Adjustment and Satisfaction with Prosthesis Among People after Upper Limb Amputation in Slovenia.
Šosterič K; Burger H; Vidmar G
Ortop Traumatol Rehabil; 2020 Apr; 22(2):85-93. PubMed ID: 32468997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Differences in quality of movements made with body-powered and myoelectric prostheses during activities of daily living.
Engdahl SM; Gates DH
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon); 2021 Apr; 84():105311. PubMed ID: 33812199
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Towards assessing the preferred usage features of upper limb prostheses: most important items regarding prosthesis use in people with major unilateral upper limb absence-a Dutch national survey.
Kerver N; van der Sluis CK; van Twillert S; Krabbe PFM
Disabil Rehabil; 2022 Dec; 44(24):7554-7565. PubMed ID: 34813394
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
