Objective: To explore adults’ experiences of lower limb amputation, focusing on the changes in self-identity related to the impairment.
Design: A cross-sectional and qualitative study, using semi-structured interviews. Interviews were transcribed, coded and analysed by two independent researchers.
Setting: A rehabilitation medicine service from a general public hospital.
Participants: A convenience sample of 42 patients with lower limb amputation performed after the age of 18 and followed up in the physical medicine and rehabilitation department of a general hospital.
Main outcome measures: A semi-structured interview, addressing three core areas: the emotional impact of amputation; the adjustment process; and the relation with the external resources.
Results: Eight themes emerged from interviews: reactions and feelings about becoming amputee; changes in own life; problems in well-being; relation with the prosthesis; self-perceptions; aims related to the rehabilitation and future plans; relation with the rehabilitation; and perceived social support. These results supported a theoretical model for the self-identity changes related to limb loss.
Conclusions: The self-identity changes after a lower limb amputation appear beyond the patient’s body image and functioning, affecting the patient’s awareness of the impairment, biographical self and any future projections.
MoxeyPHofmanRHinchliffeRJonesKThompsonMHoltP. Epidemiological study of lower limb amputation in England between 2003 and 2008. Br J Surg2010; 97: 1348–1353.
2.
BuzgováRBuzgaMKristiníkováJ. WHOQOL: Assessment of quality of life in patients after lower limb amputation. Acta Med Martiniana2009; 9: 33–40.
3.
BosmansJSuurmeijerTHulsinkMvan der SchansCGeertzenJDijkstraP. Amputation, phantom pain and subjective well-being: a qualitative study. Int J Rehabil Res2007; 30: 1–8.
4.
DemetKMartinetNGuilleminFPaysantJAndréJ. Health related quality of life and related factors in 539 persons with amputation of upper and lower limb. Disabil Rehabil2003; 25: 480–486.
5.
MurrayC. Being like everybody else: the personal meanings of being a prosthesis user. Disabil Rehabil2009; 31: 573–581.
6.
de GodoyJBraileDBuzattoSLongoOFontesO. Quality of life after amputation. Psychol Health Med2002; 7: 397–400.
7.
GallagherPMacLachlanM. Adjustment to an artificial limb: a qualitative perspective. J Health Psychol2001; 6: 85–100.
8.
CoffeyLGallagherPDesmondDHorganOMacLachlanM. Psychosocial adjustment to diabetes related amputation. Diabet Med2009; 26: 1063–1067.
RybarczykBEdwardsRBehelJ. Diversity in adjustment to a leg amputation: Case illustrations of common themes. Disabil Rehabil2004; 26: 944–953.
11.
SinghRRipleyDPentlandB. Depression and anxiety symptoms after lower limb amputation: the rise and fall. Clin Rehabil2009; 23: 281–286.
12.
SjödahlCGardGJarnloG. Coping after trans-femoral amputation due to trauma or tumour - a phenomenological approach. Disabil Rehabil2004; 26: 851–861.
13.
WilliamsREhdeDSmithsDCzernieckiJHoffmanARobinsonL. A two-year longitudinal study of social support following amputation. Disabil Rehabil2004; 26: 862–874.
14.
WilliamsonGMSchulzRBridgesMWBehanAM. Social and psychological factors in adjustment to limb amputation. J Soc Behav Pers1994; 9: 249–268.
15.
HanleyMJensenMEhdeDHoffmanAPattersonDRobinsonL. Psychosocial predictors of long-term adjustment to lower-limb amputation and phantom limb pain. Disabil Rehabil2004; 26: 882–893.
16.
MurrayCFoxJ. Body image and prosthesis satisfaction in the lower limb amputee. Disabil Rehabil2002; 24: 925–931.
17.
BraekeyJ. Body image: the lower limb amputee. J Prosthet Orthot1997; 9: 58–66.
18.
MayerAKudarKBretzKTihanyiJ. Body schema body awareness. Prosthet Orthot Int2008; 32: 363–382.
19.
StokesDCurzioJBerryABaconEMortenMBarkerL. Pre prosthetic mobility: The amputees’ perspectives. Disabil Rehabil2009; 31: 138–143.
20.
BorjeSBosmansJvan der SchansCGeertzenJDijkstraP. Phantom pain: a sensitivity analysis. Disabil Rehabil2004; 26: 905–910.
21.
EphraimPWegenerSMacKenzieEDillinghamTPezzinL. Phantom pain, residual limb pain, and back pain in amputees: results of a national survey. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2005; 9: 58–66.
22.
GallagherPAllenDMacLachlanM. Phantom limb pain and residual limb pain following lower limb amputation: a descriptive analysis. Disabil Rehabil2001; 23: 522–530.
23.
OaksfordKFrudeNCuddihyR. Positive coping and stress-related psychological growth following lower limb amputation. Rehabil Psychol2005; 50: 266–277.
24.
DesmondDMacLachlanM. Coping strategies as predictors of psychosocial adaptation in a sample of elderly veterans with acquired lower limb amputations. Soc Sci Med2006; 62: 208–216.
25.
SaradjianAThompsonADattaD. The experience of men using an upper limb prosthesis following amputation: positive coping and minimizing feeling different. Disabil Rehabil2008; 30: 871–883.
26.
MurrayC. An interpretative phenomenological analysis of the embodiment of artificial limbs. Disabil Rehabil2004; 26: 963–973.
27.
UnwinJKacperekLClarkeC. A prospective study of positive adjustment to lower limb amputation. Clin Rehabil2009; 23: 1044–1050.
28.
ParkesC. Psycho-social transitions: Comparison between reactions to loss of a limb and loss of a spouse. Br J Psychiatry1975; 127: 204–210.
29.
HorganOMacLachlanM. Psychosocial adjustment to lower-limb amputation: a review. Disabil Rehabil2004; 26: 837–850.
30.
Van der LindeHHofstadCGeertzenJPostemaKVan LimbeekJ. From satisfaction to expectation: the patient’s perspective in lower limb prosthetic care. Disabil Rehabil2007; 29: 1049–1055.
31.
HamillRCarsonSDorahyM. Experiences of psychosocial adjustment within 18 months of amputation: an interpretative phenomenological analysis. Disabil Rehabil2010; 32: 729–740.
32.
CoutureMDesrosiersJCaronC. Cognitive appraisal and perceived benefits of dysvascular lower limb amputation: a longitudinal study. Arch Gerontol Geriatr2011; 52: 5–11.
EsquenaziA. Amputation rehabilitation and prosthetic restoration. From surgery to community reintegration. Disabil Rehabil2004; 26: 831–836.
37.
OliveiraRAFragosoMJ. Identity, rehabilitation process and the adjustment to disability. Mediterranean J Phys Rehabil Med2006; 42: 52–55.
38.
RusinMUomotoJPsychotherapeutic interventions. In: FrankRGRosenthanMCaplanB (eds) Handbook of rehabilitation psychology, second edition. Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 2010, pp.259–271.
