Effectiveness of Four Orthotic Insoles on Pain in the Lower Body Associated With Musculoskeletal Stress
NCT ID: NCT04746755
Last Updated: 2021-02-10
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
TERMINATED
NA
145 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2019-06-21
2020-03-05
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Effect of Postural Insoles on Stability and Leg Muscular Activity
NCT04836650
Plantar Fasciitis and the Use of Orthotics as Treatment
NCT04894383
Orthotic Use for Chronic Low Back Pain
NCT00976664
Custom Molded Foot Orthoses Effect on Foot Kinematics and Lower Extremity Electromyography During Walking and Running.
NCT02143947
Baropodometric Patterns Associated with Metatarsalgia
NCT06534073
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The investigation design included two periods; 'run-in' period and 'treatment' period. The treatment period comprised of two sub-periods; a 'breaking-in' period and the 'full use' period. The breaking-in period was intended to allow time for the subjects' feet to accustom to wearing the insoles. The full-use period was used to determine effectiveness of the insoles. These periods constitute lengths of time defined for the purpose of the investigation as "working episodes". Working episodes were defined as at least 3 (up to 6) consecutive working days of at least 6 hours each at work, following at least 2 consecutive non-working days.
Eligible subjects at Visit 1 (screening) were enrolled into the run-in period, where subjects were assessed prior to treatment with the insoles under investigation. During the run-in period, consisting of one working episode, subjects self-reported their pain without using insoles on a daily basis (Q3-9 of the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)), in order to provide the baseline data to which the insoles were compared. Eligible subjects were enrolled into the treatment period at Visit 2 and assigned the insole relevant to the target pain area/pain area combination. Insole use was built up gradually during a breaking-in period, which constituted one working episode, with at least one nonworking day prior to the start of the working episode. Following the breaking-in period, the full-use period commenced. During the treatment period, subjects wore the insoles on working days and as much as possible on non-working days, self-reporting their pain daily (BPI Questions 3 - 9 inclusive).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
NON_RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Experimental: Lower back pain associated with musculoskeletal stress
Subjects eligible for the study self selected the insole for the pain in-accordance with the pain that they were experiencing due to musculoskeletal stress. Subjects within this arm of the study experienced lower back pain; the subjects selection was corroborated by a physiotherapist.
Orthotic Insole: Lower Back
This Insole is a full-length shaped orthotic insole, with a heel cup and an arch support. The insole can cover several shoe sizes and can be cut to the correct size to fit in the shoe.
Experimental: Heel pain associated with musculoskeletal stress
Subjects eligible for the study self selected the insole for the pain in-accordance with the pain that they were experiencing due to musculoskeletal stress. Subjects within this arm of the study experienced pain in the heels of their feet; the subjects selection was corroborated by a physiotherapist.
Orthotic Insole: Heel
This Insole is a horseshoe shaped flexible heel cup with a softer area where the heel would be expected.
Experimental: Knee to Heel pain associated with musculoskeletal stress
Subjects eligible for the study self selected the insole for the pain in-accordance with the pain that they were experiencing due to musculoskeletal stress. Subjects within this arm of the study experienced Knee to Heel pain; the subjects selection was corroborated by a physiotherapist.
Orthotic Insole: Knee to Heel
This Insole is a ¾ length rigid orthotic insole with a softer area where the heel would be expected. Each insole will cover several shoe sizes.
Experimental: Arch pain associated with musculoskeletal stress
Subjects eligible for the study self selected the insole for the pain in-accordance with the pain that they were experiencing due to musculoskeletal stress. Subjects within this arm of the study experienced pain in the arch of their feet; the subjects selection was corroborated by a physiotherapist.
Orthotic Insole: Arch
This Insole is a ¾ length shaped medical device with a softer area incorporated into the ball of foot and heel area and an external arch.
support and 6-8 mm metatarsal dome. The slim fit insole runs from the heel along under the arch of the foot and reaches to just behind the toes to prevent squashing the toes in tight fitting shoes.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Orthotic Insole: Lower Back
This Insole is a full-length shaped orthotic insole, with a heel cup and an arch support. The insole can cover several shoe sizes and can be cut to the correct size to fit in the shoe.
Orthotic Insole: Heel
This Insole is a horseshoe shaped flexible heel cup with a softer area where the heel would be expected.
Orthotic Insole: Knee to Heel
This Insole is a ¾ length rigid orthotic insole with a softer area where the heel would be expected. Each insole will cover several shoe sizes.
Orthotic Insole: Arch
This Insole is a ¾ length shaped medical device with a softer area incorporated into the ball of foot and heel area and an external arch.
support and 6-8 mm metatarsal dome. The slim fit insole runs from the heel along under the arch of the foot and reaches to just behind the toes to prevent squashing the toes in tight fitting shoes.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Those who understood the purpose of the investigation, cooperate with the investigation procedures and tasks and were to attend the investigational site for all investigation assessments.
3. Those were willing to continue with their normal daily activities, including any cosmetic foot care regimens (including the use of products) throughout the investigation and not partake in exercise which is not normal for them and which would be deemed by the Investigator to impact study assessments, or any new foot care or podiatric treatments unless agreed in advance with the Investigator.
4. Those who wore the same or similar type of standard shoe during their working day/shift for at least the 4 weeks prior to enrolment (Visit 1) (or they have worn a different shoe which cause no change to their pain) and who were able to wear the same standard\* shoe during their working day / shift for the duration of the investigation.
Eligibility regarding this criterion was confirmed at Visit 1 but will also confirmed by the physiotherapist at Visit 2, following their assessment.
\*A standard shoe was defined as closed shoe, ≤2-inch heel, with an adequate sole, upper and toe box to accommodate the orthotic insole, as determined by the physiotherapist. Shoes with orthotic-type internal contouring (as determined by the physiotherapist to include features which could alter gait) or shoes with an arch support greater than 12 mm would not be permitted. Odour-eaters cannot be used during the treatment period.
5. Male and female subjects from the age of 18 years and a BMI of 18.5-29.9 kg/m² inclusive.
6. Those who had access to a mobile device (iOS or Android smart phone or tablet), with access to the internet, and are able to operate an app.
7. Those with a shoe size between 4.5 to 11 (UK).
8. Those who worked at least 30 hours per week which usually involved "working episodes"
(defined as at least 3 (up to 6) consecutive working days (of at least 6 hours each at work) following at least 2 consecutive non-working days), which were expected to continue throughout their involvement in the investigation, and included at least 4 working episodes during the 4 (up to 5)-week treatment period.
These working episodes should be non-complex in the opinion of the Investigator, to ensure continued eligibility.
9. Those who spent most (at least three quarters) of their working day on their feet, and remained in their current employment/work environment throughout the investigation period.
10. Those who have experienced pain associated with musculoskeletal stress during working episodes, for at least 4 weeks prior to enrolment (Visit 1) that they can distinguish as being in one of the following primary areas of pain or combination thereof, that the Investigator or designee considers could be treated with the relevant insole to be used in the investigation:
* Lower back
* Knee and/or Heel
* Arch
* Heel
Eligibility regarding this criterion will also be confirmed by the physiotherapist at Visit 2, following their assessment.
11. Those who scored an average of 5 (±1) on the BPI average pain item (question 5) over the first three consecutive working days of the run-in period working episode\*\*, when assessed specifically in their primary target pain area/pain area combination, as confirmed at Visit 2.
* If the run-in period constituted more than one working episode (e.g. due to the scheduling of Visit 2), only the data from the first working episode was included in the calculation to determine eligibility, providing this included at least three consecutive working days. Otherwise data from the second working episode was used.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Those who currently use prescribed orthotics for biomechanical or other issues, or have received and used prescribed orthotics within the last 12 months or over-the-counter (OTC) orthotics in the last 6 months (odour-eaters and any non-structured/non-orthotic shock-absorber insole were permitted).
3. Those with any significant medical history which in the opinion of the Investigator could have interfered with the assessments of the investigation. For example; structural conditions (e.g. bunion or bunionette), lower limb or foot injury, rheumatic disease (e.g. rheumatoid arthritis, scleroderma, polymyalgia rheumatica), fibromyalgia, neurological disease or moderate to severe depression.
4. Those who were taking any of the following medications:
1. Anti-psychotic, sedatives, muscle-relaxants or medicines intended to treat neuropathic pain
2. Anti-inflammatory medications which would reduce systemic inflammation or locally at the target pain areas (low dose Aspirin (75 mg daily) and nasal/inhaled steroids could have been considered acceptable, where in the opinion of the Investigator they would not interfere with the assessments of the investigation)
3. An unstable dose of anti-depressants (defined as a change in therapy within the last 6 months).
5. Those who are taking regular medication for targeted pain (including OTC pain relief, in excess of 2g paracetamol daily) which is either beyond the maximum recommended daily dose according to the SmPC or which the Investigator deems inappropriate for the subject to continue at the same dose throughout the investigation.
6. Those who were pregnant or who had given birth within the past 6 months.
7. Females of child-bearing potential who were unwilling to use a minimum of an "acceptable" (as defined by the Clinical Trials Facilitation Group (CFTG; 2014) recommendations) level of birth control, for the entire duration of the investigation.
Suitable methods of birth control (in accordance with "highly effective" and "acceptable" methods of birth control defined by the CTFG) included:
1. Combined (estrogen and progestogen containing) hormonal contraception associated with the inhibition of ovulation; oral, intravaginal, transdermal.
2. Progestogen-only hormonal contraception associated with the inhibition of ovulation; oral, intravaginal, transdermal.
3. Progestogen-only oral hormonal contraception, where inhibition of ovulation is not the primary mode of action
4. Male or female condom with or without spermicide
5. Cap, diaphragm or sponge with spermicide
6. Intrauterine device
7. Intrauterine hormone-releasing system
8. Bilateral tubal occlusion
9. Vasectomised partner (where this was the subject's sole sexual partner and where the vasectomised partner had received medical assessment of the surgical success)
10. Sexual abstinence (where the subject was willing to refrain from heterosexual intercourse during the entire period of the investigation in line with their preferred and usual lifestyle)
Females who were considered to be of child-bearing potential were those who were fertile, following menarche and until becoming post-menopausal unless permanently sterile. Permanent sterilisation methods include hysterectomy, bilateral salpingectomy and bilateral oophorectomy. A post-menopausal state is defined as no menses for 12 months without an alternative medical cause (Clinical Trials Facilitation Group, 2014).
8. Those who suffered from allergies or sensitivities to the raw material of the insoles (as detailed in the Investigator Brochure).
9. Those who had participated in another clinical investigation within the 3 months prior to enrolment into the run-in period.
10. Employee at the investigational site, or a partner or first degree relative of the Investigator or member of the investigation team at the site.
11. Those, in the opinion of the Investigator, who were not deemed suitable or were unable to comply fully with the investigation requirements, for any other reason.
18 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
SynteractHCR Deutschland GmbH
UNKNOWN
Reckitt Benckiser Healthcare (UK) Limited
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
CPS Research
Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Almeida JS, Vanderlei FM, Pastre EC, Martins RA, Padovani CR, Filho GC. Comparison of Two Types of Insoles on Musculoskeletal Symptoms and Plantar Pressure Distribution in a Work Environment: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Clin Med Res. 2016 Jun;14(2):67-74. doi: 10.3121/cmr.2016.1301. Epub 2016 May 26.
Amer AO, Jarl GM, Hermansson LN. The effect of insoles on foot pain and daily activities. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2014 Dec;38(6):474-80. doi: 10.1177/0309364613512369. Epub 2013 Dec 13.
Basford JR, Smith MA. Shoe insoles in the workplace. Orthopedics. 1988 Feb;11(2):285-8. doi: 10.3928/0147-7447-19880201-08.
Bonanno DR, Landorf KB, Munteanu SE, Murley GS, Menz HB. Effectiveness of foot orthoses and shock-absorbing insoles for the prevention of injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2017 Jan;51(2):86-96. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096671. Epub 2016 Dec 5.
Farrar JT, Young JP Jr, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole MR. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain. 2001 Nov;94(2):149-158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9.
Gill TK, Menz HB, Landorf KB, Arnold JB, Taylor AW, Hill CL. Identification of Clusters of Foot Pain Location in a Community Sample. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2017 Dec;69(12):1903-1908. doi: 10.1002/acr.23212. Epub 2017 Nov 14.
Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. Pharmacoeconomics. 1993 Nov;4(5):353-65. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199304050-00006.
Shabat S, Gefen T, Nyska M, Folman Y, Gepstein R. The effect of insoles on the incidence and severity of low back pain among workers whose job involves long-distance walking. Eur Spine J. 2005 Aug;14(6):546-50. doi: 10.1007/s00586-004-0824-z. Epub 2005 Jan 25.
Sobel E, Levitz SJ, Caselli MA, Christos PJ, Rosenblum J. The effect of customized insoles on the reduction of postwork discomfort. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2001 Nov-Dec;91(10):515-20. doi: 10.7547/87507315-91-10-515.
Stanhope J. Brief Pain Inventory review. Occup Med (Lond). 2016 Aug;66(6):496-7. doi: 10.1093/occmed/kqw041. Epub 2016 Apr 11. No abstract available.
Stolt M, Suhonen R, Virolainen P, Leino-Kilpi H. Lower extremity musculoskeletal disorders in nurses: A narrative literature review. Scand J Public Health. 2016 Feb;44(1):106-15. doi: 10.1177/1403494815602989. Epub 2015 Sep 9.
Waters TR, Dick RB. Evidence of health risks associated with prolonged standing at work and intervention effectiveness. Rehabil Nurs. 2015 May-Jun;40(3):148-65. doi: 10.1002/rnj.166. Epub 2014 Jul 7.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
NPD85302
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.