Custom Dynamic Orthoses to Reduce Articular Contact Stress (PRMRP FPA CT)
Primary Purpose
Ankle Fractures, Post-traumatic Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis Ankle
Status
Not yet recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Carbon Fiber Custom Dynamic Orthosis (CDO)
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional other trial for Ankle Fractures focused on measuring Carbon Fiber, Gait Analysis, Ankle Foot Orthosis, Arthritis, Biomechanics, Ankle, Adult
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Between the ages of 18 and 65
- Sustained unilateral fracture of the tibial pilon
- The fracture has completely healed
- Ability to walk 50 feet without use of an assistive device (cane, crutch, etc.)
- Ability to walk at a slow to moderate pace
- Shoe size between women's 8 and 13.5 or men's 6.5 and 12
- Ability to read and write in English and provide written informed consent
- Individuals with elevated contact stress according to model generated using standing CT images (will be answered after completing visit one)
Exclusion Criteria:
- Pain > 6/10 while walking
- Increase in pain during testing of 3/10 or greater
- Neurologic, musculoskeletal (including bilateral fractures) or other condition limiting function of the contralateral extremity
- Medical or psychological condition that would preclude functional testing (ex. moderate or severe brain injury, stroke, heart disease)
- Wounds to the calf that would prevent CDO fitting
- Fractures secondary to neuropathy or severe osteopenia
- Classification as non-ambulatory
- Previous fractures near the tibial pilon on the involved limb
- Surgery on involved limb anticipated in the next 6 months
- Requirement of a knee stabilizing device (i.e. KAFO, KO…) to perform daily activities
- Visual or hearing impairments that limit walking ability or limit the ability to comply with instructions given during testing
- BMI greater than 40
- Pregnancy- Per participant self-report. Due to the expected small number of pregnant individuals and resulting inability to account for its effect on resulting outcomes, participants will be withdrawn from the study.
Sites / Locations
- University of Iowa
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm 3
Arm Type
No Intervention
Experimental
Experimental
Arm Label
NoCDO
CDO-A
CDO-B
Arm Description
Participants will be evaluated without a CDO
The first study CDO will be designated CDO-A
The second study CDO will be designated CDO-B
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Joint Contact Stress Exposure (Model estimated)
Joint contact stress exposure (MPA-s/gait cycle) will be estimated using a participant specific musculoskeletal model.
Secondary Outcome Measures
Four Square Step Test (4SST)
The 4SST (s) is a standardized timed test of balance and agility.
Sit to Stand 5 Times (STS5)
STS5 (s) is a well-established timed measure of lower limb muscle strength and power. Participants are instructed to stand up and sit down 5 times as fast as possible.
Ankle Range of Motion
Ankle range of motion (degrees) during gait.
Peak Ankle Moment
Peak ankle moment (Nm/kg) during gait.
Peak Ankle Power
Peak ankle power (W/kg) during gait.
Center of pressure velocity timing
Timing of peak center of pressure velocity (percent stance) during gait.
Center of pressure velocity magnitude
Magnitude of peak center of pressure velocity (m/s) during gait.
Soleus Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the soleus during gait.
Tibialis Anterior Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of theTibialis Anterior during gait.
Medial Gastrocnemius Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Medial Gastrocnemius during gait.
Rectus Femoris Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Rectus Femoris during gait.
Vastus Medialis Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Vastus Medialis during gait.
Plantar Force
Force data (N) collected from the hind foot, mid foot, and forefoot, measured between the foot and orthosis during gait.
Full Information
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT05209347
Brief Title
Custom Dynamic Orthoses to Reduce Articular Contact Stress
Acronym
PRMRP FPA CT
Official Title
Custom Dynamic Orthoses to Reduce Articular Contact Stress
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
October 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Not yet recruiting
Study Start Date
November 2023 (Anticipated)
Primary Completion Date
December 2023 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
June 2024 (Anticipated)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
University of Iowa
4. Oversight
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
Yes
Product Manufactured in and Exported from the U.S.
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
The proposed study evaluates the effect of carbon fiber brace design on forces across the ankle. Research suggests that ankle arthritis develops following ankle fracture due, in part, to elevated forces on the cartilage. It is expected that carbon fiber braces can reduce forces in the ankle joint thereby reducing the risk of developing arthritis following injury. In this study, carbon fiber braces will be tested to determine how they influence the forces acting on the ankle cartilage. The proposed study will provide evidence that can be used by clinicians and researchers to design carbon fiber braces to effectively reduce forces on ankle cartilage.
Detailed Description
The primary purpose of this line of research is to investigate the effects of carbon fiber custom dynamic orthosis (CDO) use on forces and contact stress at the ankle, with the goal of reducing the development of post traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA). Research suggests that PTO develops, in part, due to increased ankle contact stress following fracture. It is expected that reducing articular contact stress has the potential to delay or prevent PTOA development. CDOs have been shown to significantly improve function after extremity injury, and show promise for offloading the injured ankle joint after severe lower extremity injuries. Therefore, the proposed effort is designed to evaluate CDOs effects on forces and articular contact stress at the ankle.
Adult participants who have sustained a traumatic ankle fracture of the tibial pilon will be evaluated while wearing two CDOs, with a primary dependent measure of ankle joint contact stress. Following consent and enrollment weight bearing computerized tomography (CT) images will be collected and used to determine the geometry of the joint, and the articular contact stress using discrete element analysis.
Participants will be cast and fit for two CDOs. Participants will be blinded to the design variation of each device and will only know them as CDO-A or CDO-B. Testing will be completed under 3 conditions: No-CDO, CDO-A, CDO-B, with each bracing condition (A/B) representing a different CDO. Physical performance measures will incorporate tests of agility, speed, and lower limb power to ensure that the CDOs do not negatively affect physical function. Questionnaires will be used to evaluate participants' current and desired activity level, pain with and without using a CDO, satisfaction with the study CDOs, perception of comfort and smoothness between CDOs, and preference between CDOs. Semi-structured interviews will be completed to fully capture the participant's perspective with each study CDO. Lower limb forces and motion will be assessed using a computerized motion capture system and force plates embedded in the floor. Forces between the foot and CDO footplate will be measured using force sensing insoles, and muscle activity data will be collected using wireless surface electromyography sensors. Each CDO will be mechanically tested, and participant demographic and anthropometric data will be recorded.
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Ankle Fractures, Post-traumatic Osteoarthritis, Osteoarthritis Ankle
Keywords
Carbon Fiber, Gait Analysis, Ankle Foot Orthosis, Arthritis, Biomechanics, Ankle, Adult
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Other
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Crossover Assignment
Model Description
All participants will be cast and fit with two CDOs. Each CDO will be labeled as CDO-A or CDO-B. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two CDO testing sequences (AB, BA) to prevent testing order from influencing study results.
Masking
Participant
Masking Description
Participants will be blinded to the different CDO designs and will only be introduced to each device as CDO-A or CDO-B.
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
20 (Anticipated)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
NoCDO
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
Participants will be evaluated without a CDO
Arm Title
CDO-A
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
The first study CDO will be designated CDO-A
Arm Title
CDO-B
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
The second study CDO will be designated CDO-B
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Carbon Fiber Custom Dynamic Orthosis (CDO)
Other Intervention Name(s)
Ankle Foot Orthosis (AFO)
Intervention Description
The carbon fiber custom dynamic orthosis will consist of a semi-rigid foot plate, a posterior carbon fiber strut, and a proximal cuff below the knee.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Joint Contact Stress Exposure (Model estimated)
Description
Joint contact stress exposure (MPA-s/gait cycle) will be estimated using a participant specific musculoskeletal model.
Time Frame
Baseline
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Four Square Step Test (4SST)
Description
The 4SST (s) is a standardized timed test of balance and agility.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Sit to Stand 5 Times (STS5)
Description
STS5 (s) is a well-established timed measure of lower limb muscle strength and power. Participants are instructed to stand up and sit down 5 times as fast as possible.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Ankle Range of Motion
Description
Ankle range of motion (degrees) during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Peak Ankle Moment
Description
Peak ankle moment (Nm/kg) during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Peak Ankle Power
Description
Peak ankle power (W/kg) during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Center of pressure velocity timing
Description
Timing of peak center of pressure velocity (percent stance) during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Center of pressure velocity magnitude
Description
Magnitude of peak center of pressure velocity (m/s) during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Soleus Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Description
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the soleus during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Tibialis Anterior Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Description
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of theTibialis Anterior during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Medial Gastrocnemius Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Description
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Medial Gastrocnemius during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Rectus Femoris Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Description
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Rectus Femoris during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Vastus Medialis Muscle Activity (Electromyography)
Description
Electromyography (EMG, % Maximum) of the Vastus Medialis during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Plantar Force
Description
Force data (N) collected from the hind foot, mid foot, and forefoot, measured between the foot and orthosis during gait.
Time Frame
Baseline
Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures:
Title
The Orthotics Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS)
Description
Satisfaction with device will be assessed using the Orthotics Prosthetics Users' Survey Satisfaction With Device Score (11-55). Lower scores indicate a better outcome.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Modified Socket Comfort Score (Comfort and Smoothness)
Description
Comfort scores range from 0 = most uncomfortable to 10 = most comfortable, and from 0 = least smooth to 10 = most smooth.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Numerical Pain Rating Scale
Description
Pain will be assessed using a standard 11-point numerical pain rating scale, in which 0 = no pain and 10 = worst pain imaginable.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Participant Device Preference
Description
The participant will rank order their preference for their standard of care device (if applicable), NoCDO, CDO-A, CDO-B on a questionnaire.
Time Frame
Baseline
Title
Semi-Structured Interview
Description
Semi-structured interviews will also be used to fully capture the patients' perspectives, experience, and opinions associated with the device options they experienced as part of the study.
Time Frame
Baseline
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
65 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Between the ages of 18 and 65
Sustained unilateral fracture of the tibial pilon
The fracture has completely healed
Ability to walk 50 feet without use of an assistive device (cane, crutch, etc.)
Ability to walk at a slow to moderate pace
Shoe size between women's 8 and 13.5 or men's 6.5 and 12
Ability to read and write in English and provide written informed consent
Individuals with elevated contact stress according to model generated using standing CT images (will be answered after completing visit one)
Exclusion Criteria:
Pain > 6/10 while walking
Increase in pain during testing of 3/10 or greater
Neurologic, musculoskeletal (including bilateral fractures) or other condition limiting function of the contralateral extremity
Medical or psychological condition that would preclude functional testing (ex. moderate or severe brain injury, stroke, heart disease)
Wounds to the calf that would prevent CDO fitting
Fractures secondary to neuropathy or severe osteopenia
Classification as non-ambulatory
Previous fractures near the tibial pilon on the involved limb
Surgery on involved limb anticipated in the next 6 months
Requirement of a knee stabilizing device (i.e. KAFO, KO…) to perform daily activities
Visual or hearing impairments that limit walking ability or limit the ability to comply with instructions given during testing
BMI greater than 40
Pregnancy- Per participant self-report. Due to the expected small number of pregnant individuals and resulting inability to account for its effect on resulting outcomes, participants will be withdrawn from the study.
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Jason M Wilken, PT, PhD
Phone
3193356857
Email
jason-wilken@uiowa.edu
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Kirsten M Anderson, BSE
Phone
3193530431
Email
kirsten-m-anderson@uiowa.edu
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Jason M Wilken, PT, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Iowa
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
University of Iowa
City
Iowa City
State/Province
Iowa
ZIP/Postal Code
52241
Country
United States
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Jason M Wilken, PT, PhD
Phone
3193356857
Email
jason-wilken@uiowa.edu
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Kirsten M Anderson, BSE
Phone
3193530431
Email
kirsten-m-anderson@uiowa.edu
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Molly Pacha, MS, ATC, LAT
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Michael C Willey, MD
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Jeff Palmer, CPO, LPO
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Donald D Anderson, PhD
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Jason M Wilken, PT, PhD
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Cesar De Cesar Netto, MD
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Matthew Karam, MD
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
J Lawrence Marsh, MD
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Plan to Share IPD
No
Learn more about this trial
Custom Dynamic Orthoses to Reduce Articular Contact Stress
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs