1. FIELD EXPERIENCE WITH SAND-CASTING AND WU- CASTING SYSTEMS IN VIETNAM Nguyen H THANH, VIETCOT, HANOI, VIETNAM Assessor Team: P POETSMA, ICRC, HCMC, VIETNAM J STEEN JENSEN, ISPO INT., DENMARK

2. FIELD EXPERIENCE IN VIETNAM SAND- CASTING SYSTEM : 2003 - 2004SAND- CASTING SYSTEM : 2003 - 2004 WU- CASTING SYSTEM : 2006 -2007WU- CASTING SYSTEM : 2006 -2007

3. SAND-CASTING OF SUPRACONDYLAR SOCKETS IPOS brim Thin stocking or women sock Pressure relief Positive sand cast. Socket test.

4. TUBULAR ENDO-SKELETAL SYSTEM WITH PYRAMID SOCKET ALIGNMENT KIT AND SACH- FOOT (FUJIAN) FROM ENDOLITE ASIA, MALAYSIA

5. WU-CASTING Casting Apply pressure areas Negative cast Rectification cast Positive cast Moulding

6. POLYPROPYLENE TRANS-TIBIAL COMPONENT WITH SACH FOOT (EB-I) FROM DANANG CENTRE, VIETNAM

7. PATIENTS FOLLOW-UP 28/34 TRANS-TIB. AMPUTEESFOLLOW-UP 28/34 TRANS-TIB. AMPUTEES AGE AT AMP. 22 y (13-44); NOW 44 y (20-57)AGE AT AMP. 22 y (13-44); NOW 44 y (20-57) WAR ORDNANCE 13, TRAUMA 8WAR ORDNANCE 13, TRAUMA 8 IN WORKIN WORK NO MOBILITY RESTRICTIONSNO MOBILITY RESTRICTIONS FOLLOW-UP AFTER 6 Mo and 11 MoFOLLOW-UP AFTER 6 Mo and 11 Mo FOLLOW-UP 10/10 TRANS-TIB. AMPUTEESFOLLOW-UP 10/10 TRANS-TIB. AMPUTEES AGE AT AMP. 25 y (10-40); NOW 47 y (15-65)AGE AT AMP. 25 y (10-40); NOW 47 y (15-65) WAR ORDNANCE 3, TRAUMA 7WAR ORDNANCE 3, TRAUMA 7 IN WORKIN WORK NO MOBILITY RESTRICTIONSNO MOBILITY RESTRICTIONS FOLLOW-UP AFTER 5 MoFOLLOW-UP AFTER 5 Mo Sand-castingWu-casting

8. CLINICAL QUALITY BENCH MARKS FOR DW-COUNTRIES ISPO RECOMMENDATION ISPO RECOMMENDATION Patient Compliance95% + 5%Patient Compliance95% + 5% Not Used 5% + 5%Not Used 5% + 5% Walks > 1km90% + 10%Walks > 1km90% + 10% Pain10% + 10%Pain10% + 10% Discomfort10% + 10%Discomfort10% + 10% Satisfied90% + 10%Satisfied90% + 10% SAND CASTING 89% 11% 79% 36% 32% 89%WUCASTING 100%100% 0%0% 80%80% 10%10% 80%80%

9. SOCKET FIT Sand-casting Wu-casting Sand-casting Wu-casting (3 (2-5) SOX) (1 SOCK) (3 (2-5) SOX) (1 SOCK) GOOD FIT19 (68%) 8 (80%) WIDE FIT 5 0 TIGHT FIT 4 2

10. Circumference comparison Patient 08Patient 07Patient 02Patient 06Patient 01 SandWuSandWuSandWuSandWuSandWu Patella tendon3332.930.5293332.73735.536.537.2 (+4cm)30 2928.530.529.83333.233 (+4cm)282726.325.827.526.5312931.531 (+4cm)25.52424.824.224.522.82927.33029 Patient 02Patient 03Patient 04Patient 09Patient 10 SandWuSandWuSandWuSandWuSandWu Patella tendon3230.33433.533303836.529.528.6 (+4cm)29.829.43231.430.52835.53527.527 (+4cm)2726.129.527.226.52534.532.725.324 (+4cm)2523.526.524.62423.5313024.122.5

11. Difference Circumference Wu < Sand-cast MedianMinMax Students' TTEST Patella Tendon1.30.13.00.001 Patella Tendon + 4 cm0.5-0.22.50.045 Patella Tendon + 8 cm1.20.52.30.0001 Patella Tendon + 12 cm1.50.51.90.00002

12. CONCLUSIONS DOES NOT ELIMINATE INVOLVEMENT OF PROFESSIONEL PROSTHETISTDOES NOT ELIMINATE INVOLVEMENT OF PROFESSIONEL PROSTHETIST WU-CASTING SYSTEM HAS GOOD RESULT OF SOCKET FITTING COMPARE WITH SAND-CASTING SYSTEM.WU-CASTING SYSTEM HAS GOOD RESULT OF SOCKET FITTING COMPARE WITH SAND-CASTING SYSTEM. NEED MORE INVESTIGATION ON IT.NEED MORE INVESTIGATION ON IT.