Does the Spraino low-friction shoe patch prevent lateral ankle sprain injury in indoor sports? A pilot randomised controlled trial with 510 participants with previous ankle injuries

Filip Gertz Lysdal, Thomas Bandholm, Janne Schurmann Tolstrup, Mikkel Bek Clausen, Stephanie Mann, Pelle Baggesgaard Petersen, Thor Buch Grønlykke, Uwe G Kersting, Eamonn Delahunt, Kristian Thorborg, Filip Gertz Lysdal, Thomas Bandholm, Janne Schurmann Tolstrup, Mikkel Bek Clausen, Stephanie Mann, Pelle Baggesgaard Petersen, Thor Buch Grønlykke, Uwe G Kersting, Eamonn Delahunt, Kristian Thorborg

Abstract

Background: Lateral ankle sprains are common in indoor sports. High shoe-surface friction is considered a risk factor for non-contact lateral ankle sprains. Spraino is a novel low-friction patch that can be attached to the outside of sports shoes to minimise friction at the lateral edge, which could mitigate the risk of such injury. We aimed to determine preliminary effectiveness (incidence rate and severity) and safety (harms) of Spraino to prevent lateral ankle sprains among indoor sport athletes.

Methods: In this exploratory, parallel-group, two-arm pilot randomised controlled trial, 510 subelite indoor sport athletes with a previous lateral ankle sprain were randomly allocated (1:1) to Spraino or 'do-as-usual'. Allocation was concealed and the trial was outcome assessor blinded. Match and training exposure, number of injuries and associated time loss were captured weekly via text messages. Information on harms, fear-of-injury and ankle pain was also documented.

Results: 480 participants completed the trial. They reported a total of 151 lateral ankle sprains, of which 96 were categorised as non-contact, and 50 as severe. All outcomes favoured Spraino with incidence rate ratios of 0.87 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.23) for all lateral ankle sprains; 0.64 (95% CI 0.42 to 0.98) for non-contact lateral ankle sprains; and 0.47 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.88) for severe lateral ankle sprains. Time loss per injury was also lower in the Spraino group (1.8 vs 2.8 weeks, p=0.014). Six participants reported minor harms because of Spraino.

Conclusion: Compared with usual care, athletes allocated to Spraino had a lower risk of lateral ankle sprains and less time loss, with only few reported minor harms.

Trial registration number: NCT03311490.

Keywords: ankle; injury prevention; randomised controlled trial; sports; sprain.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: TBG is the founder of Spraino ApS. FGL is a paid employee in Spraino ApS. Spraino ApS was responsible for provision of Spraino. The conflict was accommodated by restricting Spraino ApS and authors FGL and TBG from having any deciding role in the design of the study, in the execution, analyses, interpretation of data, or decision to submit results. Statistical analyses were performed externally by JS who was blinded to group allocation. KT had full authority of the trial administration. The three senior clinical researchers (KT, TB and ED) had full authority in terms of submission for publication. Copenhagen Center for Health Technology (CACHET) and Innovation Fund Denmark had no scientific role in the trial. KT is an Associate Editor of the British Journal of Sports Medicine. ED is a Senior Associate Editor of the British Journal of Sports Medicine in the area of foot and ankle injuries.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Indoor sports shoe with Spraino low-friction patches attached on the outside.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Preventive mechanism of Spraino: in case of a bad landing, Spraino minimises the otherwise high shoe–surface friction at the lateral edge of the shoe. This minimises the horizontal ground reaction forces (GRFs), thereby bringing the GRF vector closer towards the joint centre which serves to prevent excessive ankle inversion and internal rotation.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials flow diagram.

References

    1. Doherty C, Delahunt E, Caulfield B, et al. . The incidence and prevalence of ankle sprain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective epidemiological studies. Sports Med 2014;44:123–40. 10.1007/s40279-013-0102-5
    1. Gribble PA, Bleakley CM, Caulfield BM, et al. . Evidence review for the 2016 international ankle Consortium consensus statement on the prevalence, impact and long-term consequences of lateral ankle sprains. Br J Sports Med 2016;50:1496–505. 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096189
    1. Vuurberg G, Hoorntje A, Wink LM, et al. . Diagnosis, treatment and prevention of ankle sprains: update of an evidence-based clinical guideline. Br J Sports Med 2018;52:956 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098106
    1. Dragoo JL, Braun HJ. The effect of playing surface on injury rate: a review of the current literature. Sports Med 2010;40:981–90. 10.2165/11535910-000000000-00000
    1. Olsen OE, Myklebust G, Engebretsen L, et al. . Relationship between floor type and risk of ACL injury in team handball. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2003;13:299–304. 10.1034/j.1600-0838.2003.00329.x
    1. Pasanen K, Parkkari J, Rossi L, et al. . Artificial playing surface increases the injury risk in pivoting indoor sports: a prospective one-season follow-up study in Finnish female floorball. Br J Sports Med 2008;42:194–7. 10.1136/bjsm.2007.038596
    1. Wannop JW, Worobets JT, Stefanyshyn DJ. Footwear traction and lower extremity joint loading. Am J Sports Med 2010;38:1221–8. 10.1177/0363546509359065
    1. Herzog MM, Mack CD, Dreyer NA, et al. . Ankle Sprains in the National Basketball association, 2013-2014 through 2016-2017. Am J Sports Med 2019;47:2651–8. 10.1177/0363546519864678
    1. Wright IC, Neptune RR, van den Bogert AJ, et al. . The influence of foot positioning on ankle sprains. J Biomech 2000;33:513–9. 10.1016/S0021-9290(99)00218-3
    1. Lysdal FG, Jakobsen L, Grønlykke TB, et al. . A kinematic analysis of the Spraino ® realignment mechanism during simulated noncontact ankle sprain injuries. Footwear Sci 2019;11:S167–9. 10.1080/19424280.2019.1606309
    1. Schmidt B. Proof of principle studies. Epilepsy Res 2006;68:48–52. 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2005.09.019
    1. Bandholm T, Christensen R, Thorborg K, et al. . Preparing for what the reporting checklists will not tell you: the prepare trial guide for planning clinical research to avoid research waste. Br J Sports Med 2017;51:1494–501. 10.1136/bjsports-2017-097527
    1. Chan A-W, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, et al. . Spirit 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ 2013;346:e7586–42. 10.1136/bmj.e7586
    1. Eldridge SM, Chan CL, Campbell MJ, et al. . Consort 2010 statement: extension to randomised pilot and feasibility trials. Pilot Feasibility Stud 2016;2:1–32. 10.1186/s40814-016-0105-8
    1. Verhagen EALM, Bay K. Optimising ankle sprain prevention: a critical review and practical appraisal of the literature. Br J Sports Med 2010;44:1082–8. 10.1136/bjsm.2010.076406
    1. Tassignon B, Verschueren J, Delahunt E, et al. . Criteria-based return to sport decision-making following lateral ankle sprain injury: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. Sports Med 2019;49:601–19. 10.1007/s40279-019-01071-3
    1. van Belle G. Statistical rules of thumb. 2nd ed New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2002.
    1. Spraino ApS Produktinformation. Copenhagen: Spraino ApS, 2017.
    1. Dick R, Agel J, Marshall SW. National collegiate athletic association injury surveillance system commentaries: introduction and methods. J Athl Train 2007;42:173–82.
    1. Møller M, Attermann J, Myklebust G, et al. . Injury risk in Danish youth and senior elite handball using a new SMS text messages approach. Br J Sports Med 2012;46:531–7. 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091022
    1. Møller M, Wedderkopp N, Myklebust G, et al. . Validity of the SMS, phone, and medical staff examination sports injury surveillance system for time-loss and medical attention injuries in sports. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2018;28:252–9. 10.1111/sms.12869
    1. Delahunt E, Coughlan GF, Caulfield B, et al. . Inclusion criteria when investigating insufficiencies in chronic ankle instability. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2010;42:2106–21. 10.1249/MSS.0b013e3181de7a8a
    1. Gribble PA, Delahunt E, Bleakley C, et al. . Selection criteria for patients with chronic ankle instability in controlled research: a position statement of the International ankle Consortium. Br J Sports Med 2014;48:1014–8. 10.1136/bjsports-2013-093175
    1. Janssen KW, van Mechelen W, Verhagen EALM. Bracing superior to neuromuscular training for the prevention of self-reported recurrent ankle sprains: a three-arm randomised controlled trial. Br J Sports Med 2014;48:1235–9. 10.1136/bjsports-2013-092947
    1. Roos KG, Kerr ZY, Mauntel TC, et al. . The epidemiology of lateral ligament complex ankle sprains in national collegiate athletic association sports. Am J Sports Med 2017;45:201–9. 10.1177/0363546516660980
    1. Salaffi F, Stancati A, Silvestri CA, et al. . Minimal clinically important changes in chronic musculoskeletal pain intensity measured on a numerical rating scale. Eur J Pain 2004;8:283–91. 10.1016/j.ejpain.2003.09.004
    1. Webster KE, Feller JA, Lambros C. Development and preliminary validation of a scale to measure the psychological impact of returning to sport following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction surgery. Phys Ther Sport 2008;9:9–15. 10.1016/j.ptsp.2007.09.003
    1. Mansournia MA, Altman DG. Invited commentary: methodological issues in the design and analysis of randomised trials. Br J Sports Med 2018;52:553–5. 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098245
    1. Spratt M, Carpenter J, Sterne JAC, et al. . Strategies for multiple imputation in longitudinal studies. Am J Epidemiol 2010;172:478–87. 10.1093/aje/kwq137
    1. Rubin DB. Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. Wiley-Interscience, 2004.
    1. Mansournia MA, Altman DG. Inverse probability weighting. BMJ 2016;352:i189. 10.1136/bmj.i189
    1. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, et al. . Consort 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;340:c332 10.1136/bmj.c332
    1. Fong DT-P, Hong Y, Chan L-K, et al. . A systematic review on ankle injury and ankle sprain in sports. Sport Med 2007;37:73–94. 10.2165/00007256-200737010-00006
    1. Orchard JW, Powell JW. Risk of knee and ankle sprains under various weather conditions in American football. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2003;35:1118–23. 10.1249/01.MSS.0000074563.61975.9B
    1. McGuine TA, Brooks A, Hetzel S. The effect of lace-up ankle braces on injury rates in high school basketball players. Am J Sports Med 2011;39:1840–8. 10.1177/0363546511406242
    1. Zarzycki R, Failla M, Arundale AJH, et al. . Athletes with a positive psychological response to return to sport training have better outcomes one and two years after ACL reconstruction. Orthop J Sport Med 2017;5:2325967117S0032 10.1177/2325967117S00324
    1. Lentell G, Baas B, Lopez D, et al. . The contributions of proprioceptive deficits, muscle function, and anatomic laxity to functional instability of the ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1995;21:206–15. 10.2519/jospt.1995.21.4.206
    1. Ioannidis JPA, Evans SJW, Gøtzsche PC, et al. . Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med 2004;141:781–8. 10.7326/0003-4819-141-10-200411160-00009

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner