User Satisfaction of Customised 3D Printed Ankle-Foot Orthosis in Comparison to Thermoformed Ankle-Foot Orthosis for Patients With Neurological Conditions: A Preliminary Study

November 7, 2021 updated by: Tan Tock Seng Hospital

Study Design and Subject Recruitment: This was a cross-sectional study in a single centre outpatient setting at the Foot Care and Limb Design Centre, Tan Tock Seng Hospital. As this was a proof-of-concept clinical trial for the introduction of 3D printed AFOs as a patient service, only 5 subjects were recruited based on consecutive sampling.

Interventions: Thermoformed AFOs moulded over the subject's lower limb plaster model served as the control intervention. The plaster models were rectified by an orthotist with over 20 years of experience and the AFO design was determined according to the subject's clinical presentation and needs. The AFOs were manufactured from 4 - 5mm thick homopolymer polypropylene. 3D printed AFOs served as the treatment intervention. It was fabricated through 3D scanning with an Artec Eva 3D scanner (Artec 3D, Luxembourg, Luxembourg) and an adjustable Perspex glass foot plate, CAD modelling with the OrtenShape software (Proteor, Saint-Apollinaire, France), and printed using fused deposition modelling with the Fortus 450mc (Stratasys, Minnesota, United States). The 3D printed AFO is printed of Polyamide Nylon-12 material in the same thickness as the thermoformed AFO. There were no blinding procedures as both interventions were distinctly different and it is not possible to blind subjects with daily use of the AFOs.

Trial Schedule: A thermoformed and a 3D printed AFO were fitted to each subject in a single session. The QUEST survey was administered post-fitting. Subjects brought home both AFOs and were instructed to wear them during ambulation, alternating between the AFOs daily. Subjects returned for follow-up at 3 weeks and 6 weeks post-fitting for necessary adjustments and the administration of the QUEST surveys was repeated for each AFO.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

5

Phase

  • 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

      • Singapore, Singapore
        • Tan Tock Seng Hospital

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

Ages Eligible for Study

21 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Existing patients of the centre,
  • Clinical need for an AFO due to neurological disorders.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Cognitive impairment
  • Lower limb volume fluctuations
  • Severe foot/ ankle varus or valgus deformities
  • Lower limb contractures of over 10°
  • Non-community ambulators

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: Treatment
  • Allocation: N/A
  • Interventional Model: Single Group Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Adults with neurological disorders
3D Printed (Fused Deposition Modelling) Ankle-Foot Orthosis with Polyamide Nylon-12 material
Thermoformed Ankle-Foot Orthosis with homopolymer polypropylene

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Change in Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) scores
Time Frame: Baseline, 3 weeks follow-up and 6 weeks follow-up
QUEST 2.0 comprises of 12 items, with 8 items related to user satisfaction with assistive devices and 4 service-related items. Responses for the QUEST items were based on a 5-level response scale, with 1 - Not satisfied at all; 2 - Not very satisfied; 3 - More or less satisfied; 4 - Quite satisfied; and 5 - Very satisfied.
Baseline, 3 weeks follow-up and 6 weeks follow-up

Collaborators and Investigators

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

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 (Actual)

November 3, 2017

Primary Completion (Actual)

August 22, 2018

Study Completion (Actual)

August 22, 2018

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

October 20, 2021

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 7, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

November 17, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

November 17, 2021

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 7, 2021

Last Verified

November 1, 2021

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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 Stroke

Clinical Trials on 3D Printed Ankle-Foot Orthosis

3
Subscribe