Microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee (MPK) compared to non-MPK after limb amputation in adults

Reading time less than 1 minute
This page contains 1 evidence gap
  1. Microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee (MPK) compared to non-MPK after limb amputation in adults
Population:
Adults after unilateral amputation of lower extremity, transfemoral amputation (TFA), or amputation through the knee joint (KD)
Intervention:
Microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee (MPK)
Comparison:
Non-MPK
Outcomes:
Performance-based outcomes (e.g. mobility, balance), self-reported outcomes (e.g. prosthesis-related quality of life), safety outcomes (e.g. self-reported number of falls, stumbling and fear of falling)

What evidence is needed?

More primary research is needed.

What evidence is available?

Reliable systematic reviews that show evidence gaps:

Sztaniszláv K, Sonnby K. Effekt av mikroprocessorstyrd protesknäled efter amputation av nedre extremitet [Effect of microprocessor-controlled prosthetic knee after limb amputation]. Örebro: HTA-enheten CAMTÖ; 2024. HTA-rapport 2024:66. More about the review

Reliable, but not updated, systematic reviews that show evidence gaps:

None identified

Registration number:
Published:
Research conducted after publication could potentially change the nature of the evidence.
To top

Evidence gap identifies methods or practices for which no conclusive systematic review of benefits and harms has been published. Gaps in scientific evidence appear on the SBU website to help researchers and granting agencies identify areas that are in need of research or systematic review. An additional objective is to offer healthcare and social service providers a basis for setting priorities.