Foot Orthoses and Elderly Women With Osteoporosis

March 9, 2012 updated by: Ibsen Coimbra, University of Campinas, Brazil

The Effect of Foot Orthoses on the Balance of Elderly Women With Osteoporosis

The objective of this study was to determine if foot orthoses are effective in improving balance, pain and disability in elderly women with osteoporosis.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Aging has been associated with balance impairment. The use of foot orthoses has been shown to be a feasible strategy for improving postural control.The objective of this study was to determine if foot orthoses (with metatarsal pad and medial arch support) are effective as an adjuvant treatment to improve balance, foot pain and disability in elderly women with osteoporosis. Another purpose was to verify if social demographic and clinical factors such as age, race, education, marital status, age of menopause, use of drugs related to balance dysfunction, visual or hearing complaints, body mass index, previous fractures and number of falls may influence the results.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
94

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Brazil
    • São Paulo
      • Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
        • Clinical Hospital of The State University of Campinas

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

60 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

Female

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Clinical diagnosis of osteoporosis

Exclusion Criteria:

  • reduced tactile and thermal foot sensibility
  • compromised skin integrity of the lower limbs
  • autoimmune rheumatic diseases
  • vestibular symptoms
  • central nervous system pathologies
  • peripheral neuropathy
  • use of insoles in the last month
  • lower limb prostheses
  • previous history of foot surgery
  • amputation of the lower limbs
  • inability to attend the necessary reevaluations and/or to follow instructions and procedures of the research protocol

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Prevention
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Experimental: Foot orthosis
Forty-seven women in treatment in the outpatient clinic of the Rheumatology Division of State University of Campinas(UNICAMP) who met the inclusion criteria for this study (being female with osteoporosis and aged 60 or above) were assigned, at random, to wear ethyl-vinyl-acetate insoles with medial arch supports and metatarsal pads over a four-week period. Balance, using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) indexes; pain, using a numeric pain scale (NPS); and disability of the feet, using the Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index (MFPDI), were assessed at baseline and after four weeks.
Device: Foot orthosis (Orthotics Unit of the Clinical Hospital of UNICAMP)
Custom foot orthoses made of ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) with medial arch supports and metatarsal pads (supporting the diaphysis of the second to fourth metatarsals) that were manufactured by the Orthotics and Prostheses Unit of the Clinical Hospital of UNICAMP.
Other Names:
  • Orthotics Unit of the Clinical Hospital of UNICAMP.
No Intervention: Control Group
Forty-seven elderly women with osteoporosis (in treatment in the outpatient clinic of the Rheumatology Division of State University of Campinas- UNICAMP) were assigned, at random, to enter the control group with no foot intervention. Balance, using the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) indexes; pain, using a numeric pain scale (NPS); and disability of the feet, using the Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index (MFPDI), were assessed at baseline and after four weeks.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Berg Balance Scale (BBS)
Time Frame: 4 weeks
The BBS is a balance assessment test that rates the ability of a subject to maintain balance while performing each of 14 movements required in everyday activities (transferring, standing unsupported, rising from a sitting to a standing position, tandem standing, turning 360° and single-leg standing). Scoring is based on an ordinal 5-point scale from 0 to 4. Total scores ranges from 0 to 56. The smaller value, the worse balance: from 0-20: a whell chair is needed: 20-41: needing walk assistence; 41-56 - independent walking.
4 weeks
Timed up and Go Test (TUG)
Time Frame: 4 weeks
The TUG test is used to assess the dynamic balance of an individual. It measures the amount of time (recorded in seconds) it takes for the individual to rise from a standard arm chair, walk a distance of 3 meters and return to the initial position resting against the back of the chair.
4 weeks

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Numeric Pain Scale
Time Frame: 4 weeks
Subjects were asked to rate the pain in their feet on a scale from 0 to 10 (0: no pain, 10: extremely severe pain)
4 weeks
Manchester Foot and Pain Disability Index(MFPDI)
Time Frame: 4 weeks
The MFPDI is a test used to assess disability related to foot pain in elderly. It consists of 19 statements prefaced by the phrase "Because of pain in my feet…", organized under three constructs: functional limitation (10 items), pain intensity (five items), and personal appearance (two items). For each statement, there are three possible answers: "none of the time" (score = 0), "some days" (score = 1), and "most days/every day" (score = 2). The final score is the sum of all the items and ranges from 0 to 38. The higher score, the greater disability.
4 weeks

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
University of Campinas, Brazil

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Study Director: Eduardo P Magalhaes, MD, PhD, University of Campinas, Brazil
  • Study Director: Ibsen B Coimbra, MD,PhD, University of Campinas, Brazil
  • Study Director: Michael Davitt, University of Campinas, Brazil
  • Principal Investigator: Cecília M Barbosa, MSc, University of Campinas, Brazil
  • Study Director: João Francisco Marques-Neto, MD,PhD, University of Campinas, Brazil
  • Study Chair: Manoel B Bértolo, MD,PhD, University of Campinas, Brazil

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
April 1, 2011

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
October 1, 2011

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
October 1, 2011

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
January 6, 2012

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 10, 2012

First Posted (Estimate)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
January 11, 2012

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
April 6, 2012

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 9, 2012

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
February 1, 2012

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • UNICAMP-REUMATO 01

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Osteoporosis

Clinical Trials on Foot orthosis (Orthotics Unit of the Clinical Hospital of UNICAMP)

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings