ArticlePLOS global public health2026
Proposed standards for prosthetic foot reuse and considerations for donation of used prosthetic feet to low-and middle-income countries.
Article in PLOS global public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Lower limb prosthesis abandonment and recycling of used components in the public healthcare sector of the Eastern Cape Province of South Africa.Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prosthetic components from high-income countries (HICs) are often replaced not because they are broken, but because of guidelines or expired warranties, meaning they may still be usable. As most HICs classify prostheses as single patient multi-use devices, components are often disposed of or donated to low- and middle- income countries (LMICs) where medical device regulatory frameworks are limited or non-existent. A lack of standards guaranteeing the quality of donated prosthetic components could lead to a violation of the World Health Organization's principles of good donation. Here, we work towards the creation of a set of standards by quantifying the efficacy of a second-hand donated prosthetic foot quality checklist developed by STAND. We compared 170 checked to 196 unchecked feet received by prosthetic and orthotic centres in Fort Portal, Uganda, and found checklist implementation increased the percentage of usable feet from 83.16% to 94.12%. Foot brand significantly affected usability, but further data and samples are needed to disentangle the effects of prosthetic foot brand, prosthetic foot model, and centre from which the feet originated on prosthetic foot usability. We propose a rapid and efficient quality assurance checklist as a first step towards a set of standards towards prosthetic foot reuse and discuss future research directions. Research towards the creation of an international set of standards/regulatory requirements governing the use of prosthetic limbs, like the international standards used for prosthetic limb design, would not only enable the safe, useful provision of prosthetic components in LMICs, but would also set the groundwork for understanding how a repair, reuse, and recycle model for prosthetic components might be implemented in HICs. Globally, this could decrease prosthetic provision time, create a circular economy for prosthetic components, and reduce the carbon footprint of prosthetic component manufacture and provision.
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.