







































 

All articles are permanently available online to the public without restrictions or subscription fees. All 

articles are free to be used, cited, and distributed, on condition that appropriate acknowledgment is 

included. Authors are the copyright holders of their original contributions and grant the Canadian 

Online Publication Group (COPG) a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original 

publisher. CPOJ articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International 

License.   

CPOJ Website: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/index 

Editorial Office: cpoj@online-publication.com    

ISSN: 2561-987X 

CPOJ is a member of, and subscribes to the principles of, the Committee on Publication Ethics 

(COPE).   

 

 

VOLUME 4, ISSUE 2  
 2021 

 

STAKEHOLDER  PERSPECTIVES 

Zahedi S. Review of prosthetics & orthotics needs for 21st Century – Vision for 2025. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, 

No.20. https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113 

This article has been invited and reviewed by Co-Editor-In-Chief, Dr. Silvia Ursula Raschke. 
English proofread by: Karin Ryan, M.A., B.Sc., P.T.   
Managing Editor: Dr. Hossein Gholizadeh 
 

SPECIAL ISSUE 

https://online-publication.com/wp/
https://online-publication.com/wp/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/index
mailto:cpoj@online-publication.com
https://publicationethics.org/about/our-organisation
https://publicationethics.org/about/our-organisation
https://publicationethics.org/members/canadian-prosthetics-orthotics-journal
https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113
https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/EDitorinchief
https://ca.linkedin.com/in/hosseingholizadeh


 

1 

Zahedi S. Review of prosthetics & orthotics needs for 21st Century – Vision for 2025. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, No.20. 
https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113 

 

 

 
STAKEHOLDER  PERSPECTIVES 

 

REVIEW OF PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS NEEDS FOR 21ST CENTURY – VISION FOR 2025 

Zahedi S* 
 

Blatchford Group, Unit D Antura, Bond Close, Basingstoke, RG24 8PZ, United Kingdom. 
 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE CONTEXT: A GLOBAL CHALLENGE 

In Lower limb Prosthetics, there are 10 million amputees 

worldwide.1 There are estimated 10,000 practitioners each 

dealing with 400 patients in a year. This then only allows the 

needs of 4 million amputees to be addressed, leaving 6 

million without access to care. WHO Standards call for 4-5 

professionals per million population. WHO’s recent figures 

of the disabled population stated 2.4 billion people need 

rehabilitation, assistive technology and mobility solutions. 

Yet, the qualified groups of professionals in the P&O sector 

remain in the thousands, which is inadequate to meet the 

needs of the millions of patients needing care.  

With the rise of poverty worldwide, there is a need to use 

the limited healthcare resources more efficiently. Validated 

and verified (health) economics tools, implemented within 

each country’s budget guides for best utilisation of  

 

 

 

 

 

resources, along with the deployment of appropriate 

technology, can guide decision-making on products and 

services with assured outcomes.  

THE OPPORTUNITY: DIGITAL HEALTH 

In prosthetics, socket comfort remains at the heart of the 

lower limb amputee rehabilitation prosthetic challenge. The 

interface with the residuum needs to be addressed based 

on real, objective science. This connection of socket to 

residual limb is, itself, a joint that dynamically moves and 

changes shape and volume due to skeletal bone movement 

inside muscles, tendon and skin soft tissue.2,3 Digital tools 

should be using algorithms developed from, and based 

upon, dynamic input from sensors at the interface with the 

residuum measuring shear and compression forces and 

simultaneously to convert this information to simulate the 

movement of this unique joint. Next, cancelling this 

movement perception by opposing actuating mechanisms, 

to create a perception of instantaneous rest (a direct 

skeletal fixation feel) in all dynamic conditions will bring 

deeper science to this last area of black magic.4   

 
OPEN  ACCESS Volume 4, Issue 2, Article No.20. 2021 

 

 

Journal Homepage: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/index 

 

ABSTRACT 

What would we do, if only we had the power to go back?! The best way to consider this is to align 

and join all the known dots. To think of Prosthetics and Orthotics (P&O) as a system holistically 

centred around care of the user, identifying all their needs continuously, in their environment and 

in their lifestyle. This could produce a new value proposition for all multi-disciplinary team 

members by generating patient-centred therapeutic benefits and clinical outcomes that align all 

stakeholders in P&O towards using a common narrative, which makes decisions based on data. 

In this case, data is the outcome, using Standards and Instruments which are validated (e.g. 

www.amprom.uk) to quantify questions such as: “Have we reduce risk of falls?”, “Have we 

reduced risk of tissue injury?”, “Have we reduced risk of low back pain?”, “Have we reduced long 

term risk of osteoarthritis?”, etc.   If we have, we are assured this will benefit the comfort and 

confidence for the user. We can have confidence in rehabilitation measured by improved stability 

and increased activity, and other measures which enable the accurate classification of products 

and services to match users. A prescription index, based on Outcomes, could, for example, be 

calculated by a formula which accounts for the percentage reduction in falls probability, a patient 

satisfaction score, a mobility score and a quality-of-life score, allowing practitioners to base their 

choices of treatment pathways and component selection.  This paper provides both the context 

for and contributing factors that make the proposing of such an objective Prescription Index an 

interesting thing to consider when discussing Health Economics in P&O.  

CITATION 

Zahedi S. Review of prosthetics & 

orthotics needs for 21st Century – Vision 

for 2025. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics 

Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, No.20. 

https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113 

KEYWORDS 

Prosthetic, Systems, Future integration, 

Health Economics Effectiveness, 

Rehabilitation, Assistive devices, 

Technology 

 

 

* CORRESPONDING AUTHOR 

Professor Sir Saeed Zahedi, 
Blatchford Group, Unit D Antura, Bond Close, Basingstoke, RG24 
8PZ, United Kingdom. 

E-Mail: saeed.zahedi@blatchford.co.uk 
ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6959-632X 

Special Issue: Health Economics in Prosthetics & Orthotics 

https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113
https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/index
https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113
mailto:saeed.zahedi@blatchford.co.uk
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6959-632X


 

2 

Zahedi S. Review of prosthetics & orthotics needs for 21st Century – Vision for 2025. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, No.20. 
https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113 

ISSN: 2561-987X 
PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS NEEDS FOR 21ST CENTURY  

Zahedi S., 2021 CPOJ 

Special  

 

S
P

E
C

IA
L

 I
S

S
U

E
 

Data from smart liners with embedded sensors allow such 

objective measures to be collected. This enables both 

subjective and objective virtual assessment, with web-

based accessibility allowing communication to an expert in 

any location around the globe to share knowledge and 

clinical experiences. This digital data is what is needed to 

create objective Prescription Indices to guide P&O decision-

making.  Tele-medicine (for initial assessment, virtual triage, 

and final follow up) combined with hand held scanners, 3D 

additive manufacture printers, mobile centres for fitting, 

fabrication at remote satellite centres, and drone deliveries 

are already a reality.5,6   

Figure 1 shows a Systems thinking model for continuous 

monitoring of patients that supports best function, creating 

rehabilitation pathways using local resources and allowing 

for experts’ experiences to be accessed for addressing 

issues. Within this model, data collected can also be used 

to prevent costly tissue damage and to enable user 

participation in their rehabilitation. This is the collaborative 

way of addressing this major challenge.  It is estimated over 

50% of amputees need one socket or major adjustment per 

year at a treatment cost $10k, so working solutions to 

address this can result in considerable cost savings.5,7,8  

Figure 1: Systems Thinking:  three health states needing different 

resources. (Diagram from Blatchford Institute) 

A FUNDAMENTAL REALITY: HEALTH 

ECONOMICS  

Health Economics plays a daily role in making decisions in 

all areas of health care. The American Orthotics and 

Prosthetics Association (AOPA) understood this when 

engaging the RAND Corporation to carry out the 

Microprocessor Controlled Knee (MPK) project to produce 

a report for use in justification of equivalent models.9 This in 

turn set in motion the UK’s National Health Service’s MPK 

Policy and leads the narrative on health economics/cost-

benefit/future business models in P&O that are linked to 

outcome measures.10 Based on evidence, these works are 

being used for policy making decisions and developing 

technology road maps. Some examples of the measures 

used to support decision making in the above process are: 

      Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) 

The QALY is a healthcare measure that takes into account 

both the quantity and quality of life. One QALY indicates one 

year of perfect health. Additional QALYs provided by a given 

intervention, B, compared to an existing treatment, A, is 

calculated by the difference in Utility scores for each 

intervention for a given year (determined from certain 

patient-reported outcome measures, such as EQ-5D-5L or 

SF36) multiplied by the number of years, over which the 

treatment is being considered. 

      Financial cost 

Though not a patient health consideration, inevitably the 

financial cost of a new, innovative intervention will always 

be considered. In particular, it will be compared to the cost 

of existing, alternative treatments and must be weighed 

against the potential for patient benefit. 

       Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio 

Incremental Cost-Effective Ratio (ICER) is a means of 

factoring both patient benefit and fiscal burden into a single 

metric. It is calculated as the ratio of the difference financial 

cost between the new treatment and the existing one, to the 

QALYs added by the new treatment. 

𝐼𝐶𝐸𝑅 =  
𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝐵 − 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝐴

𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒. (𝑈𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦𝐵 − 𝑈𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦𝐴)
 

 

In the RAND study,9 ICER was used to do a cost 

effectiveness comparison of MPKs with other commonly 

funded medical procedures (Figure 2). Also added is data 

reported on another prosthetics intervention: 

Osseointegration11 (OI). Costs for OI have been converted 

from the originally reported 2016/17 Australian dollars to 

2016 US dollars (1 AUD : 0.76 USD) to aid comparison with 

other reported data.9  

POTENTIAL FUTURE DISRUPTOR: 

OSSEOINTEGRATION 

While there are tools and measures such as the QALY that 

can be used to objectively evaluate current technology and 

processes, new techniques such as OI have the potential to 

be very disruptive to the status quo.  As work progresses on 

this, members of the Prosthetics Working group of the 

International Standards Organization (ISO) are in process 

of setting an ISO subgroup to look at fail safe mechanism 

New 

patient 

New 

patient 

Healthy 

Minor 

Issue 

Major 

Issue 

https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113


 

3 

Zahedi S. Review of prosthetics & orthotics needs for 21st Century – Vision for 2025. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, No.20. 
https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113 

ISSN: 2561-987X 
PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS NEEDS FOR 21ST CENTURY  

Zahedi S., 2021 CPOJ 

Special  

 

S
P

E
C

IA
L

 I
S

S
U

E
 

requirement specifications, test methods and test loads for 

Osseointegration. The first subgroup workshop on this topic 

was organised with the Assessment Research Centre 

(ARC) at the University of Melbourne where it was 

demonstrated that a variety of failsafe mechanism designed 

by different organisations had been done so with little 

reference to structural safety load standards used in lower 

limb prosthetics.  All manufacturers are now keen to work 

together to establish a common standard to reduce rate of 

mechanical failures and protect users. This will, in time, will 

lead to a common procedure for selection, standard surgical 

operating procedures and post-operative care that will 

reduce risk of implant failures.12 Once OI is an established 

rehabilitation pathway, it will open up a whole new 

dimension in System Thinking in lower limb (already 

envisioned by some of the organisation in upper limb), as 

the direct route to connectivity to physiological nerves and 

muscles is provided.  This will also have an impact on the 

economics of prosthetic care throughout the lifetime of the 

patient. 

Figure 2: Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio comparison of 

Microprocessor Prosthetic Knees (MPK), Osseointegration (OI), 

Total Knee angioplasty (TKA), and Prophylactic cardioverter 

defibrillator implantation (PCDI). All values in 2016 USD9,11. 

(Diagram from Blatchford Institute) 

 

AN UNADDRESSED NEED: EDUCATION 

Technology and Digital health at affordable prices needs to 

be the facilitator and robust science must replace the black 

magic upon which much of our current understanding of 

P&O is based. Furthermore, this must be done with the 

support of P&O educators.  Currently most P&O educators  

are simply asking if their courses are fit for purpose – which 

is to support and maintain the status quo.  It must be asked 

critically and answered with honesty:  

• Will the graduates of 2025 have the right knowledge 

to meet the global challenges they will face?  

• Will they know how to reduce the risk of tissue 

injury?   

• Will they understand the effect of pressure, shear 

and moisture on the residual limb interface?  

• Will they be able to use objective data? (e.g. by 

correctly reading and interpreting data provided by 

innovative measurement systems)  

• Will they be able to use the results to make clinical, 

design and fit decisions?    

• Will the P&O practitioner have the knowledge and 

skills to treat the socket to residuum interface as a 

joint and be able to manage the bone movement 

inside soft tissue?  

• How will they integrate sensors in a new product 

(that can detect and adjust the interface device 

independently) into their practices in a way that is 

also economically viable? 

 

All this, and more, becomes new material to be integrated 

into the curriculum if educators are to prepare the clinicians 

of the future for the technology of product and services 

together, which will be arriving as early as 3-5 years from 

now.  In adopting them, these technologies need to be 

justified by health economics/cost-benefit/future business 

models in P&O and must be linked to outcome measures 

that are based on evidence. This is crucial for policy making 

decision and continued development of the technology road 

map.  

One way of describing this future model is a future of 

“Servitisation”, which is the integration of Product and 

Services together. Customised to individual need, it is made 

in a bespoke manner.  An example of what this model could 

look like is shown in Figure 3. 

P&O educators have a role to play in including such new 

ways of structuring into what we know and what the data 

tells us. We can integrate this into existing health economics 

and care models such as (for example) a “Pillars of Health 

Care” approach.  In lower limb prosthetics, the four Pillars 

for Heath Economic Evidence are reducing the risk of falls, 

tissue injury, lower back pain and osteoarthritis (Figure 4).  

Doing so requires not only new models and data, but also 

e-documentation, generating new data supporting the 

pillars of evidence based practice. 

 

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

MPK OI TKA PCDI

IC
E

R
 (

$
0

0
0

s
)

ICER v other medical procedures

PROSTHETICS OTHER MEDICINE

Cost-effective threshold range

https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113


 

4 

Zahedi S. Review of prosthetics & orthotics needs for 21st Century – Vision for 2025. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, No.20. 
https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113 

ISSN: 2561-987X 
PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS NEEDS FOR 21ST CENTURY  

Zahedi S., 2021 CPOJ 

Special  

 

S
P

E
C

IA
L

 I
S

S
U

E
 

 

 

Figure 4: Educational Need for future “Servitisation” – A four Pillars 

Model for Lower Limb Prosthetics Using Validated Patient Reported 

Outcomes (Diagram from Blatchford Institute) 

A BLACK SWAN? ACCELERATION BY COVID 

Industry moving towards a digital health cloud-based 

system is well on the way. The vision of 2020 has most 

recently been accelerated by the 2020-2021 global Covid-

Virus Pandemic. In the UK, the system interface gateways 

are already in the advanced stage with NHSx  

(www.nhsx.nhs.uk) which is overseeing the digitization of 

the NHS in partnership  with other healthcare providers 

building the required infrastructure. 

Accelerated by Covid, investors are increasingly looking to 

opportunities with Medical technology and more specifically 

devices with apps, whose usage is becoming a core part of 

care. Virtual assessment in P&O services and online triage 

are going to stay in this New World and will be harnessed 

as part of cost-rationalisation. This is more necessary than 

ever as pressure of budgets on healthcare and the extra 

cost of advances in technology, compel all stakeholders to 

look to cut out waste, increase productivity and become 

leaner. The review of Prosthetic services is already taking 

place in UK, re mapping the provision for next 10 years. The 

global community response to the WHO GATE project1  

expands the opportunity in their call for care of the world’s 

1billion disabled people and acknowledges that addressing 

mobility needs via Assistive Technology will become an 

even greater challenge, with millions more people with 

disability to be caused by Covid-19. There already exists an 

insufficient number of clinicians to cater to 60% of cases 

across the world,1 so there remains a challenge for all with 

respect to responding to this global need. The gap between 

3D scanning 
to capture 

residuum shape

CAD CAM software to 
make adjustments and 

rectifications

Additive manufacturing 
creates socket

Delivery at home, reducing 
required clinical visits

Sensors in 
e-prosthesis 
remotely monitor
activity and 

status

Internet-based web app

Clinic alerted; appt request 
sent to patient by SMS

Data captured 
and transmitted 
by smartphone 

Anonymous data 
stored on open-
source internet 

database 

Figure 3: “Servitisation” model for Local/Satellite and central fabrication. Pilot study illustration from MovAid13 

Four key secondary healthcare  

issues of prosthesis users 

https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113


 

5 

Zahedi S. Review of prosthetics & orthotics needs for 21st Century – Vision for 2025. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, No.20. 
https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113 

ISSN: 2561-987X 
PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS NEEDS FOR 21ST CENTURY  

Zahedi S., 2021 CPOJ 

Special  

 

S
P

E
C

IA
L

 I
S

S
U

E
 

developed and developing nations will become even wider. 

A corresponding rise of poverty rates will make achieving 

UN Sustainable Development Goals even harder. With 

increasing private investors ownership of P&O companies, 

longer term vision may suffer, but there is more potential for 

capital investment to respond to these challenges with 

viable solutions.  

Changes already underway 

More recently, there has been a move by many suppliers to 

central fabrication and utilisation of 4th industrial revolution 

technology for sustainability of logistic supply chain and 

delivery improvement. Central Fabrication was the standard 

method of services some 40 years ago. With advances in 

engineering, the shift from a craft-based system to industrial 

systems, the creation of modular assembly Prostheses & 

Orthoses, in the last century there was a divergence and 

separation of product and services. The craft-based 

technician capable of fitting a patient became the clinical 

Prosthetists and Orthotists, who were trained and educated 

in universities and colleges resulting in the generation of 

degree-qualified education of P&O healthcare 

professionals, who have served our communities. The 

evolution of technology is now again converging product 

and services. This requires a review of current education 

and training.  It must be asked: Is the current education a fit 

for future? Does it align with future requirement of Multi-

Disciplinary Team care of disabled population? Does it meet 

industry and health care needs? Any suppliers who only 

provide services are finding it difficult to grow. The suppliers 

of P&O components are now developing products and 

technology where the designed and manufactured products 

must be directly fitted to patients, matched objectively to the 

user in shape, form, activity and lifestyle.  The only thing that 

is not changing and remains certain is the how all these 

parameters will be changing.  

The future holds customisation and bespoke devices which 

are made to measure to fit and with embedded technology. 

Devices that sense changes and automate the process of 

scheduling replacements and which will, eventually, 

automatically adjust themselves in response to change, are 

all part of the future of P&O care.  

Regulatory Evolution 

With increasing globalisation and reliance on technical 

solutions, there is a need for safety, as well as policing 

against rogue players and the development of a level 

playing field. The emergence of evidence-based practice 

and the required evolution of validated and verified outcome 

measures are critical to protect the patient. Documentation 

of mitigation of risks and decision-making, as well as 

continuous monitoring, feeding continuous development is 

rapidly becoming a standard procedure across all medical 

industries. P&O will not be exempt. The emergence of the 

EU Medical Devices Regulations (MDR)14 replacing 

previous Directive in Europe, and its alignment with FDA in 

North America, will all be sitting on a platform of Medical 

Quality international standards. All stakeholders must be 

preparing for and expecting compliance. These changes will 

require clinicians, by law, to assess risk versus benefit and 

to make decisions based on previously collected and 

systematically reviewed objective evidence.   

CALL TO ACTION  

1) Adoption of a “Pillars of Health” model, as described 

above   

The pillars must be defined by and supported by evidence-

based data supported criteria and must be economically 

justifiable.  Those responsible for making this happen are all 

the authorities, organizations and persons in power in P&O 

sector 

2) Making changes to P&O education  

P&O Educators must be educating P&O students to be able 

to adopt digital tools and digital ways of thinking.  Graduates 

must be able  to make decisions based on evidence 

supported by data, where that data is comprised of 

Outcome, Standards and Instruments, that are validated, in 

order to quantify what has been done. This will ensure that 

all decisions are based on data and economic justification. 

They must also understand: how the data inform and 

support the pillars of healthcare, the relationship between 

economics, regulation and policy, and how each will be 

changed by the digitisation of healthcare. The educational 

outcome must be a practitioner that uses the same narrative 

across all of P&O sector. Finally, as technology and digital 

health’s costs go down and  become available at an 

affordable price, there is a need for a graduate who can act 

as a facilitator for future rehabilitation and robust science - 

a model that must replace the current craft model. This 

cannot be achieved without the support of P&O educators. 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

Support of Dr McGrath Head of Blatchford institute in preparing 

above diagram and reviewing health economic analysis and Dr 

Moser through discussion leading to formulation of ideas, European 

Commission for Horizon 2020 MovAid grant and team and partners 

on this project is greatly acknowledged. 

DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING 

INTERESTS 

I am an employee of Blatchford. 

SOURCES OF SUPPORT 

There are no external financial support. Horizon 2020 EU grant 

2014-2017 

 

https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113


 

6 

Zahedi S. Review of prosthetics & orthotics needs for 21st Century – Vision for 2025. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2021; Volume 4, Issue 2, No.20. 
https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113 

ISSN: 2561-987X 
PROSTHETICS & ORTHOTICS NEEDS FOR 21ST CENTURY  

Zahedi S., 2021 CPOJ 

Special  

 

S
P

E
C

IA
L

 I
S

S
U

E
 

REFERENCES 

1.Priority Assistive Products list [Internet]. World Health 

Organization (WHO). [cited 2021 May 7]. Available from: 

https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/priority-assistive-products-

list 

2.Tang J, McGrath M, Laszczak P, Jiang L, Bader DL, Moser D, et 

al. Characterisation of dynamic couplings at lower limb 

residuum/socket interface using 3D motion capture. Med Eng Phys. 

2015;37:1162–8. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2015.10.004 

3.Tang J, McGrath M, Hale N, Jiang L, Bader D, Laszczak P, et al. 

A combined kinematic and kinetic analysis at the residuum/socket 

interface of a knee-disarticulation amputee. Med Eng Phys. 

2017;49:131–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2017.08.014 

4.ISPO UK member’s society socket technology workshop report 

[Internet].2019;  [cited 2021 May 7]. Available from: 

https://www.ispo.org.uk/resources/1559900611_Socket-

Technology-Workshop-25-April-2019---FINAL-REPORT.pdf  

5.ISPO symposium on telehealthi [Internet]. SPO Webinar 2020: 

Tele Medicine in PO. [cited 2021 May 7]. Available from: 
https://www.ispoint.org/news/530460/ISPO-SYMPOSIUM-ON-

TELEHEALTH.htm 

6.UN Unido [Internet]. United Nations Industrial Development 

Organization, 2021; [cited 2021 May 7]. Available from:   

https://www.unido.org/ 

7.Datta D, Vaidya SP, Alsindi Z. Analyses of prosthetic episodes in 

trans-tibial amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int. 1999;23:9–12. DOI: 

10.3109/03093649909071605 

8.Nair A, Hanspal RS, Zahedi MS, Saif M, Fisher K. Analyses of 

prosthetic episodes in lower limb amputees. Prosthet Orthot Int. 

2008;32:42–9. DOI: 10.1080/03093640701610615 

9.Liu HH, Chen C, Hanson MA, Chaturvedi R, Mattke S, Hillestad 

R. Economic value of advanced transfemoral prosthetics 

[Internet]. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2017. 

 [cited 2021 May 7]. Available from:  

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2096.html 

10.Clinical Commissioning Policy: Microprocessor controlled 

prosthetic knees [Internet]. NHS England, 2016; [cited 2021 May 

7]. Available from: https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-

content/uploads/2016/12/clin-comm-pol-16061P.pdf 

11.Frossard LA, Merlo G, Burkett B, Quincey T, Berg D. Cost-

effectiveness of bone-anchored prostheses using osseointegrated 

fixation: Myth or reality? Prosthet Orthot Int. 2018;42(3):318–27. 

DOI: 10.1177/0309364617740239. 

12.ISPO osseointegration seminar report [Internet]. ISPO, 2018; 

[cited 2021 May 7]. Available from: 

https://www.ispo.org.uk/resources/20180308---ISPO-

Osseointegration-Seminar-Report---FINAL.pdf 

13.Movement assisting devices [Internet]. MovAid project. [cited 

2021 May 7]. Available from: www.movaid.eu 

14.Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of 

the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices, amending Directive 

2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 

1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 

93/42/EEC [Internet]. Off J Europ Uni. 2017; [cited 2021 May 7]. 

Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017R0745 

AUTHOR SCIENTIFIC BIOGRAPHY 

Professor Sir Saeed Zahedi 

has over 40 years of 

experience in the field of 

prosthetics and he and his 

team have created outstanding 

results for many thousands of 

amputees around the world, 

giving them back the 

opportunity to live their lives to 

the fullest. He was responsible 

for the commercialisation of the 

first Intelligent Prosthesis in the 

early 1990s and the world’s 

first fully integrated limb 

system, Linx, in 2014. In 2018 Queens Birthday Honours List, he 

was named to receive a Knighthood for his outstanding services to 

Innovation and Engineering in the field of rehabilitation. Sir Saeed 

is a multi-award winning author and presenter of over 170 papers, 

books and scientific publications and over 60 patents.  He works for 

Blatchford, a global company who develops and manufactures 

orthopaedic products that offer the best possible mobility, function, 

comfort and cosmetics after amputation or other pathology.  For 

over 130 years, Blatchford has been involved in provision of 

services, design and development of assistive technologies for 

mobility.  Their main focus has been enabling independence and 

social participation for lower limb amputees and real living for 

people with neuromuscular conditions. The reward has been 

witnessing renaissance in application of technology that has 

transformed lives. A Fellow of the Royal Academy, 2018 Honorary 

fellow of the Institute of Mechanical Engineers, Special 

Commendation in the Prince Philip Designer prize in 2011 and RSA 

Royal Designer for Industry in 2013. He and his team were the 

winner of US Medical Design Excellence Award, German Design 

Award in 2017 following their 2016 Mc Roberts’s engineering award 

(Gold medal and finalists in the 2010) adding to their 4th Queens 

Awards for technological achievement. In 2014 he received BHTA 

life time achievement award, and the team is EEF 2013 winner of 

winners, for smart product and export. In 2017 he received AOPA 

life time achievement award. Working on Integration 

(products+services = servitization) in Prosthetics and Orthotics.     

 

https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v4i2.37113
https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/priority-assistive-products-list
https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/priority-assistive-products-list
https://www.ispo.org.uk/resources/1559900611_Socket-Technology-Workshop-25-April-2019---FINAL-REPORT.pdf
https://www.ispo.org.uk/resources/1559900611_Socket-Technology-Workshop-25-April-2019---FINAL-REPORT.pdf
https://www.ispoint.org/news/530460/ISPO-SYMPOSIUM-ON-TELEHEALTH.htm
https://www.ispoint.org/news/530460/ISPO-SYMPOSIUM-ON-TELEHEALTH.htm
https://www.unido.org/
https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2096.html
https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/clin-comm-pol-16061P.pdf
https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/clin-comm-pol-16061P.pdf
https://www.ispo.org.uk/resources/20180308---ISPO-Osseointegration-Seminar-Report---FINAL.pdf
https://www.ispo.org.uk/resources/20180308---ISPO-Osseointegration-Seminar-Report---FINAL.pdf
http://www.movaid.eu/
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017R0745
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32017R0745

