ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To synthesize evidence for (1) the effectiveness of exercise-based rehabilitation interventions in the community and/or at home after transfemoral and transtibial amputation on pain, physical function, and quality of life and (2) the extent of inequities (unfair, avoidable differences in health) in access to identified interventions. DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, PEDro, Cinahl, Global Health, PsycINFO, OpenGrey, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched from inception to August 12, 2021, for published, unpublished, and registered ongoing randomized controlled trials. STUDY SELECTION: Three review authors completed screening and quality appraisal in Covidence using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Included were randomized controlled trials of exercise-based rehabilitation interventions based in the community or at home for adults with transfemoral or transtibial amputation that assessed effectiveness on pain, physical function, or quality of life. DATA EXTRACTION: Effectiveness data were extracted to templates defined a priori and the PROGRESS-Plus framework was used for equity factors. DATA SYNTHESIS: Eight completed trials of low to moderate quality, 2 trial protocols, and 3 registered ongoing trials (351 participants across trials) were identified. Interventions included cognitive behavioral therapy, education, and video games, combined with exercise. There was heterogeneity in the mode of exercise as well as outcome measures employed. Intervention effects on pain, physical function, and quality of life were inconsistent. Intervention intensity, time of delivery, and degree of supervision influenced reported effectiveness. Overall, 423 potential participants were inequitably excluded from identified trials (65%), limiting the generalizability of interventions to the underlying population. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions that were tailored, supervised, of higher intensity, and not in the immediate postacute phase showed greater promise for improving specific physical function outcomes. Future trials should explore these effects further and employ more inclusive eligibility to optimize any future implementation.