Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experiences Scales

Original Editor - Mariam Hashem

Top Contributors - Mariam Hashem and Sheik Abdul Khadir

Introduction

Developed by the Department of Psychology Trinity College Dublin, the Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales (TAPES) is a self-administered questionnaire that comprises psychosocial adjustment, activity restriction, and prosthetic satisfaction domains, each with 3 subscales. With further exploration of residual pain, phantom limb pain and other medical problems.Thereby incorporating both the physical and psychosocial aspects of adjustment.[1]

Objective

It aims to enable an examination of the psychosocial processes involved in adjusting to an artificial limb, the specific demands of wearing a prosthesis, and the potential sources of maladjustment. From a research perspective, the TAPES can facilitate the exploration of the relationships between different variables and the identification of those factors, which promote successful rehabilitation and adjustment to wearing a lower-limb prosthesis.[2]

Intended Population

Lower limb amputation patients[1]


Method

TAPES consists of 9 subscales. There are 3 psychosocial subscales: general adjustment , social adjustment, and adjustment to limitation. Each of these subscales contains 5 items, which are measured along a 5-point rating scale (strongly disagree, disagree, neither agree nor disagree, agree, strongly agree). Scores range from 5 to 25, with higher scores indicating greater levels of adjustment.

The TAPES also contain 3 activity restriction subscales: functional activity restriction , social activity restriction , and athletic activity restriction . Each of these activity restriction subscales contains 4 items, which are measured along a 3-point scale (not at all limited, limited a little, limited a lot). Scores range from 3 to 12, with higher scores indicating greater activity restriction.

There are 3 additional subscales that assess satisfaction with the prosthesis, measured along a 5-point scale (very dissatisfied, dissatisfied, neither dissatisfied nor satisfied, satisfied, very satisfied). The functional satisfaction subscale contains 5 items, with a potential score range from 5 to 25. There are 5 items in the aesthetic satisfaction subscale (eg, color), with a potential score range from 4 to 20. Because weight satisfaction contains only 1 item, scores in this subscale range from 1 to 5. Higher scores in each of the satisfaction subscales indicate greater satisfaction with the prosthesis.

The TAPES also look at the experience of phantom limb pain, residual limb pain, and other medical problems not related to the amputation. Each of the aforementioned is subdivided into questions relating to (1) the type of pain experienced, (2) how often it is experienced, (3) how long each episode lasts, (4) how the level of pain can be described, and (5) the extent to which it interferes with daily life. This section of the TAPES also incorporate 2 items requesting respondents to rate their general health and physical capabilities measured, along a 5-point scale (very poor, 1; very good, 5).[2]

TAPES

Evidence

The ability of the TAPES to predict a significant amount of variance for each of the 4 domains of QOL identified by the WHOQOL highlights the potential usefulness of the TAPES as a disorder-specific index of Quality of Life (QOL) for amputees.[2] The subscales of TAPES displayed high internal reliability, and preliminary evidence indicating various forms of validity.[1]

Validity

Gallagher & MacLachlan tested the construct validity of TAPES against the World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire WHOQOL:BREF and found a significant correlation between scores on the Psychological scale of the WHOQOL:BREF and general adjustment ( r = .733, p < .0001) as measured by the TAPES. The Social Relationships scale of the WHOQOL:BREF was strongly correlated ( r = .709, p < .0001) with the Social Adjustment subscale of the TAPES, and it was correlated to a lesser extent with the Social Restriction subscale ( r = -.356, p < .01). There was no correlation with either the Athletic Activity Restriction or Functional Restriction subscale. The Physical Health scale of the WHOQOL:BREF was strongly correlated ( r = .624, p < .0001) with the Adjustment to Limitation subscale of the TAPES. There were also strong correlations between the Physical Health scale and the Functional Restriction ( r = -.601, p < .0001), Athletic Activity Restriction ( r = -.634, p < .0001), and Social Restriction ( r = -.618, p < .0001) subscales.[1]

They also found a significant and positive correlation between the Clarity of Feelings subscale of the TMMS and the General Adjustment ( r = .409, p < .005), Social Adjustment (.560, p < .0001) and Adjustment to Limitation ( r = .493, p < .001) subscales of the TAPES. There was also a significant and positive correlation between the Repair subscale of the TMMS and the General Adjustment ( r = .547, p < .0001), Social Adjustment ( r = .578, p < .0001), and Adjustment to Limitation ( r = .337, p < .01) subscales.[1]

Reliability

Each subscale of TAPES was tested for internal reliability and they all displayed high internal reliability.[1]

Internal Reliability and Intercorrelations of Satisfaction Subscales[1]

subscale 1 2 3
1-Functional ____
2-Asthetic .405 ____
3-Weight .298 .233 ___
Internal reliability (Cronbach) .854 0.777

Internal Reliability and Intercorrelations of Activity Restriction Subscale[1]

subscale 1 2 3
1-Functional ____
2-Social .530 ____
3-Asthetic .630 .465 ___
Internal reliability (Cronbach) .865 0.838 0.763

Internal Reliability and Intercorrelations of Psychological Adjustments Subscales[1]

subscale 1 2 3
1-General ____
2-Social .460 ____
3-Limitation .545 .391 ___
Internal reliability (Cronbach) .886 0.862 0.833



References

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 Gallagher, P., & MacLachlan, M. (2000). Development and psychometric evaluation of the Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales (TAPES). Rehabilitation Psychology, 45(2), 130-154.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 Gallagher, P., Maclachlan, M., P, A. G., & Trinity, M. M. T. (2004). The Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scales and Quality of Life in People With Lower-Limb Amputation, 85(May). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.009