File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Unilateral antebrachial agenesis and prosthesis: As seen by parents and by healthcarers | Agénésie unilatérale d'avant-bras et prothétisation: Mise en regard des représentations de parents et de professionnels

TitleUnilateral antebrachial agenesis and prosthesis: As seen by parents and by healthcarers | Agénésie unilatérale d'avant-bras et prothétisation: Mise en regard des représentations de parents et de professionnels
Authors
Issue Date2002
Citation
Revue De Chirurgie Orthopedique Et Reparatrice De L'appareil Moteur, 2002, v. 88 n. 2, p. 117-124 How to Cite?
AbstractPurpose of the study: Antebrachial agenesis is a congenital deformity which is not invalidating for the children who have a level of independence comparable to that of other children of the same age. Although the appropriateness of a prosthesis is rarely questioned by healthcarers, it is clear that it is the healthcarers' own representation of this condition (their knowledge of the deformity and of the prosthesis proposed) that leads to the indication. The purpose of this study was to better understand the respective representations of unilateral antebrachial agenesis to help determine appropriate health care proposals. Material and methods: An intensive survey using semi-directive interviews was conducted in 16 families. Group interviews with three healthcare teams were then conducted. Results: Three leading topics appeared: worry about the social integration of the child, a paradoxical representation of the child perceived as independent but handicapped, and a largely negative image of the prosthesis. There was a rather important difference in the representations formulated by the parents and by the healthcarers. Discussion: The discussion focused on awareness of the narcissistic content of the expectations and the plastic and functional implications of prosthesis fitting, perceived differently by parents and healthcarers. Conclusion: The nature of the expected result involves a change in the representation of the child more than a change in the child's body, a concept which in itself is not a true objective of healthcare. Taken the understandably difficult position of healthcarers, it might be useful to propose a different scheme for the first consultation.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154184
ISSN
2010 Impact Factor: 0.546
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChoumon, Ben_US
dc.contributor.authorRitz, Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorCorbet, Een_US
dc.contributor.authorGréco, Jen_US
dc.contributor.authorBérard, Cen_US
dc.date.accessioned2012-08-08T08:23:45Z-
dc.date.available2012-08-08T08:23:45Z-
dc.date.issued2002en_US
dc.identifier.citationRevue De Chirurgie Orthopedique Et Reparatrice De L'appareil Moteur, 2002, v. 88 n. 2, p. 117-124en_US
dc.identifier.issn0035-1040en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/154184-
dc.description.abstractPurpose of the study: Antebrachial agenesis is a congenital deformity which is not invalidating for the children who have a level of independence comparable to that of other children of the same age. Although the appropriateness of a prosthesis is rarely questioned by healthcarers, it is clear that it is the healthcarers' own representation of this condition (their knowledge of the deformity and of the prosthesis proposed) that leads to the indication. The purpose of this study was to better understand the respective representations of unilateral antebrachial agenesis to help determine appropriate health care proposals. Material and methods: An intensive survey using semi-directive interviews was conducted in 16 families. Group interviews with three healthcare teams were then conducted. Results: Three leading topics appeared: worry about the social integration of the child, a paradoxical representation of the child perceived as independent but handicapped, and a largely negative image of the prosthesis. There was a rather important difference in the representations formulated by the parents and by the healthcarers. Discussion: The discussion focused on awareness of the narcissistic content of the expectations and the plastic and functional implications of prosthesis fitting, perceived differently by parents and healthcarers. Conclusion: The nature of the expected result involves a change in the representation of the child more than a change in the child's body, a concept which in itself is not a true objective of healthcare. Taken the understandably difficult position of healthcarers, it might be useful to propose a different scheme for the first consultation.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofRevue de Chirurgie Orthopedique et Reparatrice de l'Appareil Moteuren_US
dc.subject.meshAdolescenten_US
dc.subject.meshArtificial Limbsen_US
dc.subject.meshChilden_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshForearm - Abnormalities - Surgeryen_US
dc.subject.meshHealth Personnel - Psychologyen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshMaleen_US
dc.subject.meshParents - Psychologyen_US
dc.titleUnilateral antebrachial agenesis and prosthesis: As seen by parents and by healthcarers | Agénésie unilatérale d'avant-bras et prothétisation: Mise en regard des représentations de parents et de professionnelsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailCorbet, E:efcorbet@hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authorityCorbet, E=rp00005en_US
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.pmid11973541-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0036230037en_US
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0036230037&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_US
dc.identifier.volume88en_US
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.spage117en_US
dc.identifier.epage124en_US
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000175143100002-
dc.publisher.placeFranceen_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridChoumon, B=6505657194en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridRitz, A=13605383800en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCorbet, E=35609873200en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridGréco, J=13605617100en_US
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBérard, C=7005581151en_US

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats