Functional and perceptive differences between conventional and advanced ankle foot orthoses in community ambulators post-limb trauma: the injuries managed with advanced bracing of the lower extremity (IM ABLE) study.

Introduction: Many military service members and civilians suffer from lower extremity trauma. Despite recent advancements in lower limb bracing technology, it remains unclear whether these newer advanced braces offer improved comfort and functionality compared to conventional options. The IDEO (Intrepid Dynamic Exoskeletal Orthosis), a type of "advanced" orthosis was developed to assist in maintaining high functional performance in patients who have experienced high-energy lower extremity trauma and underwent limb salvage surgeries. Methods: A cross-sector multi-site initiative was completed to study the efficacy of advanced ankle foot orthoses (AFO) for lower limb trauma and injury compared to a conventional AFO. Following fitting, training, and accommodation, the subjects were assessed in each AFO system for mobility, self-reported function, safety and pain, and preference. Results: They preferred the advanced over the conventional AFO and the mobility and exertion perception improved with the advanced AFO with no difference in pain or overall health status scores. Discussion: Thus, an advanced AFO is an option for trauma affecting the lower limb. Long-term studies are required to better understand the accommodation and learning process of using an advanced AFO.

Suggested Guidelines for the Prescription of Orthotic Services, Device Delivery, Education, and Follow-up Care: A Multidisciplinary White Paper.

OBJECTIVES: This article establishes needed guidelines for determining orthotic prescriber authority, documenting medical necessity, and ensuring continuity of care for patients needing orthoses. It also identifies "off-the-shelf" (OTS) devices that can safely and appropriately be delivered to patients without professional adjustment as well as those that cannot. METHODS: A multidisciplinary task force made up of experts in orthopedics and physical medicine physicians, along with therapists and certified orthotists, applied a consensus approach to answer key questions: (i) When can a device be safely, effectively delivered to the patient OTS without professional guidance or education, and which caregivers have a role in that decision? (ii) What documentation is appropriate for physicians and other caregivers to determine medical necessity? (iii) What documentation/communication ensures continuity of care among physicians, therapists, and orthotists? RESULTS: Guidelines developed for consideration of OTS orthoses include accepting documentation from collaborating caregivers, including therapists and orthotists; keeping that documentation as part of the patient's total medical record for clinical, medical necessity determinations and reimbursement purposes; and using the physician's prescription for the device as the key determinant of whether a device is delivered OTS or as a custom-fitted device. CONCLUSION: This review provides expert guidance for patient safety, minimizing wasted expenditures, maximizing clinical outcomes, and providing efficient delivery of care for Medicare and other patients. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services guidelines should be directed toward recognizing the level of expertise of the orthotist, the value of their patient encounters, and their role in facilitating the timely, safe, and effective use of orthotic devices.