398 KB22 KB200820252014Burger, HelenaMlakar, MajaZdovc, Brankoletnik:13številka:3str. 34-39ISSN:1580-9315COBISSID:1989737URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-F4EMRIKBslUniverzitetni rehabilitacijski inštitut Slovenije - SočaRehabilitacija (Ljubljana)amputacijaAmputationbathing prosthesiskopalna protezaLower ExtremitynogaPatient SatisfactionprotezePrimerjava dveh načinov izdelave kopalnih protez za osebo po amputaciji spodnjih udov| Comparison of two technologies for producing a waterproof lower limb prosthesis|Introduction: Prosthesis for bathing is resistant to water and sand. It is used in a variety of activities such as showering, swimming, in certain water sports or simply to access the water and getting out of it. Despite the development of new components, we had been producing only mechanical exoskeleton hollow prostheses based on the old technology for more than twenty years. The purpose of our project was to create new waterproof prosthesis components and compare the new and the old manufacturing process, the cost of materials and user satisfaction. Methods: We invited a 28-year old patient after traumatic right sided trans-tibial amputation and left sided trans-femoral amputation. We compared the number of stages in the process of production of exoskeletal and endoskeletal prostheses for bathing and the costs of the applied materials. User's satisfaction with the prostheses was assessed using the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire - PEQ. Results: When comparing both manufacturing processes we found that the manufacturing process of the endoskeletal prosthesis was shorter for at least three phases, while the manufacturing process of trans-femoral endoskeletal prosthesis was shorter for at least 5 phases. The costs of the materials used for both prostheses were 2.5 times higher in comparison to the manufacturing process of the mechanical exoskeleton prosthesis. The patient was very pleased with both new prostheses. Conclusion: The technological procedure for producing a modern bathing prosthesis is much faster compared to the traditional one, but the components are much more expensiveIzhodišče: Kopalna proteza je odporna na vodo in pesek. Osebe po amputaciji spodnjih udov jih uporabljajo pri različnih dejavnostih, kot so tuširanje, plavanje, pri določenih vodnih športih ali zgolj za dostop v vodo in iz nje. V Sloveniji smo, kljub razvoju novih sestavnih delov, izdelovali le eksoskeletne votle proteze po več kot dvajset let stari tehnologiji. Namen internega projekta je bil izdelati kopalno protezo z novimi vodoodpornimi sestavnimi deli ter primerjati postopka izdelave, stroške materiala in zadovoljstvo uporabnika. Metode: Vključili smo 28-letnika po desni transtibialni in levi transfemoralni amputaciji zaradi poškodbe. Primerjali smo število opravljenih faz v postopkih izdelave eksoskeltne in endoskeletne kopalne proteze in strošek porabljenega materiala. Uporabnik je zadovoljstvo s protezama ocenil v vprašalniku za ocenjevanje protez (Prosthesis evaluation questionnaire - PEQ). Rezultati: Pri primerjavi postopkov izdelave transtibialne kopalne proteze smo ugotovili, da je število faz v postopku izdelave endoskeletne proteze manjše za najmanj tri faze in v postopku izdelave transfemoralne endoskeletne proteze manjše za najmanj pet faz. Stroški uporabljenega materiala tako za transtibialno kot tudi za transfemoralno endoskeletno protezo so 2,5-krat višji kot pri izdelavi eksoskeletne proteze. Uporabnik je bil z novima protezama zelo zadovoljen. Zaključek: Tehnološki postopek izdelave novega tipa kopalne proteze je bistveno hitrejši od tradicionalnega postopka izdelave kopalne proteze, vendar pa so sestavni deli dražjiTEXTznanstveno časopisjejournalsSlovenian National E-content AggregatorNational and University Library of SloveniaUniverzitetni rehabilitacijski inštitut RS – Soča