Ankle FractureNCT02609347
Manual Therapy After Ankle/Hindfoot Fractures
A study testing Manual Therapy Group in people with Ankle Fracture and Calcaneus Fracture, run by Intermountain Health Care, Inc. at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to assess if manual therapy improves mobility, gait, and balance more than a control group for patients who have undergone open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) after an ankle/hindfoot fracture. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Ankle Fracture, Calcaneus Fracture, Talus Fracture
- What is being tested?
- Manual Therapy Group
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 72 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Nov 2015to Mar 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 70 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age 18-70 years
- Stiffness > 5.0 cm side to side difference as measured by the ankle lunge test
- Surgical management of ankle or hindfoot fracture
- Full weight-bearing (WB)
- Able to read and speak sufficient English to complete outcome tools
Who cannot join
- Any prior foot/ankle surgery, deformity, or injury on the unaffected side which would affect gait, WB dorsiflexion or balance
- Unable to attend follow-up visits
- Any cognitive impairments which would prevents patients from being able to complete or understand questionnaires
- Have received any previous manual therapy for their current ankle and/or hindfoot fracture
- Have a known non/malunion
- Have additional fractures of the spine, hip, or knee that would likely affect their weight bearing or gait
Show all 9Show fewer
- Have avascular necrosis as demonstrated on radiographs
- Syndesmotic screw intact
- Open reduction internal fixation >12 months previously
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Intermountain Healthcare
Salt Lake City, Utah, 84118
About this study
Official title: Immediate Effects of Manual Therapy for Patients After Ankle/Hindfoot Fractures
The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to assess if manual therapy improves mobility, gait, and balance more than a control group for patients who have undergone open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) after an ankle/hindfoot fracture.
Read the detailed description
This study will enroll 76 subjects with stiffness after ankle and/or hindfoot fractures. Stiffness will be defined in this study with the ankle lunge test. This test measures dorsiflexion (DF) in a weight bearing position, and a side-to-side difference of > 5.0 centimeters (cm) will be used for the criteria to determine ankle stiffness as this is greater than three times the smallest real difference of 1.38 cm. Potential subjects will be recruited by either their orthopedic surgeon or the PI and must satisfy all inclusion/exclusion criteria. Those individuals meeting the eligibility criteria who agree to participate and sign an informed consent from the appropriate Internal Review Board (IRB) will undergo a baseline assessment. The baseline assessment will be performed by a clinician blinded to the subject's treatment group assignment. Participants will be randomized to receive manual therapy (MT) or to the control group (CONTROL) based on a list generated by a computer program and sequentially numbered and placed in a sealed envelope after baseline measures are completed. Participants will then be given a chance to practice the functional tests prior to the baseline assessment, and will have a chance to rest if needed. The order in which tests are administered will be randomized by a computer generated process. Participants will be asked to perform the following tests: single limb stance (average of 3 trials), the Star excursion balance test (anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions only) (average of 3 trials), the ankle lunge test (ALT), the foot assessment platform, the MyotonPRO and walk across the GAITRite mat. Patients will perform all tests without shoes in order to standardize footwear between subjects, and all tests will be performed on both the affected and unaffected sides.
After all baseline measures have been taken, participants will be randomized to either the MT or the Control Group. Participants in the manual therapy group will receive joint mobilization and participants in the control group will receive a sham manual therapy treatment consisting of soft tissue mobilization and Grade I mobilizations at the proximal tib/fib joint. Treatment for the manual therapy group will be based on the physical therapist's clinical decision making that is fellowship trained in manual therapy. For instance, if a patient has a talar neck fracture and is lacking dorsiflexion, the therapist may choose to avoid an anterior-posterior talocrural joint mobilization which may place increased stress through the talar neck and mobilize instead the talonavicular joint and/or the subtalar joint based on stiffness.
After receiving treatment, participants will again perform the tests and measures in a random order, and will be allowed to rest as much as needed. The amount of time needed to rest between tests will be documented. Participants will return for 2 additional follow up visits between 7 to 10 days after the initial examination and measurements; however, they will only be asked to fill out the self-reported questionnaires and perform the tests and measures after the second treatment. Participants will then follow up between 7-10 days after their last manual therapy treatment for a final measurement of all tests and measures. Participants in the control group will be asked to follow-up at the same time points as the manual therapy group after their initial baseline measures and asked to complete all questionnaires and tests at the same time points as the manual therapy group. Subjects will be asked to avoid practicing balance and beginning exercises other than normal activities of daily living during this time.
Specific Aim 1: To evaluate if manual therapy improves range of motion, muscle stiffness, and in patients with ankle stiffness after ankle/hindfoot fractures more than a control group.
The dependent variables for Aim1 are weight bearing dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM), foot mobility, and muscle stiffness. The independent variables for Aim1 are treatment group (MT vs CONTROL) and time. The primary aim will be examined using a linear mixed model with repeated measures to account for the correlation among repeated observations from the same patient. Time (baseline, assessment 1 and assessment 2) and treatment group (MT and CONTROL) will be modeled as fixed effects, with the ALT as the primary dependent variable (DV). Separate models will be constructed in a similar fashion with foot mobility magnitude (FMM) and muscle stiffness as the DV. The hypothesis of interest will be the group-by-time interaction. Treatment effects will be calculated from the between-group differences in change score from baseline to assessment 1 and assessment 2.
Specific Aim 2: To evaluate if patients receiving three manual therapy treatments will have greater improvements in spatial and temporal gait parameters than a control group.
The dependent variables for Aim 2 are gait velocity and stance times. The independent variables for Aim 2 are treatment group (MT vs CONTROL) and time. The primary aim will be examined using a linear mixed model with repeated measures to account for the correlation among repeated observations from the same patient. Time (baseline, assessment 1 and assessment 2) and treatment group (MT and CONTROL) will be modeled as fixed effects, with gait velocity as the primary dependent variable (DV). A separate model will be constructed in a similar fashion with stance time as the DV. The hypothesis of interest will be the group-by-time interaction. Treatment effects will be calculated from the between-group differences in change score from baseline to assessment 1 and assessment 2.
Specific Aim 3: To evaluate if patients receiving three manual therapy treatments will have greater improvement in balance than a control group.
The dependent variables for Aim3 are distances reached on the star excursion balance test and single limb stance times. The independent variables for Aim3 are treatment group (MT vs CONTROL) and time. The primary aim will be examined using a linear mixed model with repeated measures to account for the correlation among repeated observations from the same patient. Time (baseline, assessment 1 and assessment 2) and treatment group (MT and Control) will be modeled as fixed effects, with distance reached for the star excursion balance test (SEBT) as the primary dependent variable (DV). A separate model will be constructed in a similar fashion with single limb stance time as the DV. The hypothesis of interest will be the group-by-time interaction. Treatment effects will be calculated from the between-group differences in change score from baseline to assessment 1 and assessment 2.
- Conditions
- Ankle Fracture, Calcaneus Fracture, Talus Fracture, Pilon Fracture
- Being tested
- Manual Therapy Group, Control Group
- Keywords
- Manual Therapy, Ankle Fracture, Hindfoot Fracture
- Medical subject headings
- Ankle Fractures
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Manual Therapy GroupOther
The manual therapy intervention will be based on the typed of fracture the patient sustained, and their limitations in joint mobility.
Control GroupOther
The sham intervention will consist of soft tissue mobilization and Grade I mobilization at the proximal tib/fib joint.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Manual Therapy Group | Experimental | Participants in the manual therapy group will receive 3 treatment sessions of joint mobilization based on the physical therapist's clinical decision making. Receives: Other: Manual Therapy Group |
| Control Group | Sham comparator | Participants in the control group will receive a sham manual therapy treatment consisting of soft tissue mobilization and Grade I mobilizations at the proximal tib/fib joint. Receives: Other: Control Group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Range of motion (ROM)
The dependent variable for Aim1 is weight bearing dorsiflexion ROM. The independent variables for Aim1 are treatment group (Manual therapy group versus Control group) and time
Measured: 2 weeks
Spatial and temporal gait parameters - gait velocity
The dependent variable for Aim 2 is gait velocity. The independent variables for Aim 2 are treatment group (Manual therapy group versus Control group) and time.
Measured: 2 weeks
Balance
The dependent variables for Aim3 is distances reached on the star excursion balance test. The independent variables for Aim3 are treatment group (Manual therapy group versus Control group) and time.
Measured: 2 weeks
Secondary outcomes (5)
Characteristics that predict outcomes
Multiple linear regression analysis will be performed to determine if baseline characteristics such as fracture type, age, etc can predict changes in biomechanical outcomes
Measured: 2 weeks
Foot Mobility - Foot Assessment Platform (FAP)
The dependent variable is foot mobility. The independent variables are treatment group (Manual therapy group versus Control group) and time. Foot mobility will be assessed using the FAP.
Measured: 2 weeks
Muscle Stiffness - MyotonPRO Device
The dependent variable is muscle stiffness. The independent variables are group and time. Muscles stiffness will be assessed using the MyotonPRO device.
Measured: 2 weeks
Stance Time
The dependent variable is stance time. The independent variables are group and time.
Measured: 2 weeks
Single Limb Stance Time
The dependent variable is single limb stance time. The independent variables are treatment group (Manual therapy group versus Control group) and time.
Measured: 2 weeks
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Nov 2015 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2015
- Primary completionMar 2019
- Study completionMar 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Ankle FractureStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 72 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Intermountain Health Care, Inc.
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Utah
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Stephanie Albin, Intermountain Health Care, Inc.
- Investigators
- Stephanie R Albin, DPT, FAAOMPT, Principal investigator, Intermountain Health Care
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02609347
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 1050061
- Status last verified
- Mar 2019
- First submitted
- 29 Oct 2015
- Last updated
- 13 Mar 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Not planning on sharing data
Publications
van Tetering EA, Buckley RE. Functional outcome (SF-36) of patients with displaced calcaneal fractures compared to SF-36 normative data. Foot Ankle Int. 2004 Oct;25(10):733-8. doi: 10.1177/107110070402501007.
PubMed 15566705Griffin D, Parsons N, Shaw E, Kulikov Y, Hutchinson C, Thorogood M, Lamb SE; UK Heel Fracture Trial Investigators. Operative versus non-operative treatment for closed, displaced, intra-articular fractures of the calcaneus: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2014 Jul 24;349:g4483. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g4483.
PubMed 25059747Balazs GC, Polfer EM, Brelin AM, Gordon WT. High seas to high explosives: the evolution of calcaneus fracture management in the military. Mil Med. 2014 Nov;179(11):1228-35. doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-14-00156.
PubMed 25373046Schulze W, Richter J, Russe O, Ingelfinger P, Muhr G. Surgical treatment of talus fractures: a retrospective study of 80 cases followed for 1-15 years. Acta Orthop Scand. 2002 Jun;73(3):344-51. doi: 10.1080/000164702320155374.
PubMed 12143985Hirschmuller A, Konstantinidis L, Baur H, Muller S, Mehlhorn A, Kontermann J, Grosse U, Sudkamp NP, Helwig P. Do changes in dynamic plantar pressure distribution, strength capacity and postural control after intra-articular calcaneal fracture correlate with clinical and radiological outcome? Injury. 2011 Oct;42(10):1135-43. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.09.040. Epub 2010 Nov 13.
PubMed 21075372O'Brien J, Buckley R, McCormack R, Pate G, Leighton R, Petrie D, Galpin R. Personal gait satisfaction after displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures: a 2-8 year followup. Foot Ankle Int. 2004 Sep;25(9):657-65. doi: 10.1177/107110070402500911.
PubMed 15563389Simondson D, Brock K, Cotton S. Reliability and smallest real difference of the ankle lunge test post ankle fracture. Man Ther. 2012 Feb;17(1):34-8. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2011.08.004. Epub 2011 Sep 29.
PubMed 21959254Chuang LL, Wu CY, Lin KC. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of myotonometric measurement of muscle tone, elasticity, and stiffness in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Mar;93(3):532-40. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.09.014. Epub 2012 Jan 4.
PubMed 22222143Hertel J, Braham RA, Hale SA, Olmsted-Kramer LC. Simplifying the star excursion balance test: analyses of subjects with and without chronic ankle instability. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006 Mar;36(3):131-7. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2006.36.3.131.
PubMed 16596889McPoil TG, Vicenzino B, Cornwall MW, Collins N, Warren M. Reliability and normative values for the foot mobility magnitude: a composite measure of vertical and medial-lateral mobility of the midfoot. J Foot Ankle Res. 2009 Mar 6;2:6. doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-2-6.
PubMed 19267907
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Mar 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Immediate Effects of Manual Therapy for Patients After Ankle/Hindfoot Fractures
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02609347
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 1050061
- Conditions
- Ankle Fracture, Calcaneus Fracture, Talus Fracture, Pilon Fracture
- Keywords
- Manual Therapy, Ankle Fracture, Hindfoot Fracture
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 72 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Intermountain Health Care, Inc.University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Utah
- Study start
- Nov 2015
- Primary completion
- Mar 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- Mar 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 20 Nov 2015 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The aim of this randomized controlled trial is to assess if manual therapy improves mobility, gait, and balance more than a control group for patients who have undergone open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) after an ankle/hindfoot fracture.
Detailed description
This study will enroll 76 subjects with stiffness after ankle and/or hindfoot fractures. Stiffness will be defined in this study with the ankle lunge test. This test measures dorsiflexion (DF) in a weight bearing position, and a side-to-side difference of > 5.0 centimeters (cm) will be used for the criteria to determine ankle stiffness as this is greater than three times the smallest real difference of 1.38 cm. Potential subjects will be recruited by either their orthopedic surgeon or the PI and must satisfy all inclusion/exclusion criteria. Those individuals meeting the eligibility criteria who agree to participate and sign an informed consent from the appropriate Internal Review Board (IRB) will undergo a baseline assessment. The baseline assessment will be performed by a clinician blinded to the subject's treatment group assignment. Participants will be randomized to receive manual therapy (MT) or to the control group (CONTROL) based on a list generated by a computer program and sequentially numbered and placed in a sealed envelope after baseline measures are completed. Participants will then be given a chance to practice the functional tests prior to the baseline assessment, and will have a chance to rest if needed. The order in which tests are administered will be randomized by a computer generated process. Participants will be asked to perform the following tests: single limb stance (average of 3 trials), the Star excursion balance test (anterior, posteromedial, and posterolateral directions only) (average of 3 trials), the ankle lunge test (ALT), the foot assessment platform, the MyotonPRO and walk across the GAITRite mat. Patients will perform all tests without shoes in order to standardize footwear between subjects, and all tests will be performed on both the affected and unaffected sides.
After all baseline measures have been taken, participants will be randomized to either the MT or the Control Group. Participants in the manual therapy group will receive joint mobilization and participants in the control group will receive a sham manual therapy treatment consisting of soft tissue mobilization and Grade I mobilizations at the proximal tib/fib joint. Treatment for the manual therapy group will be based on the physical therapist's clinical decision making that is fellowship trained in manual therapy. For instance, if a patient has a talar neck fracture and is lacking dorsiflexion, the therapist may choose to avoid an anterior-posterior talocrural joint mobilization which may place increased stress through the talar neck and mobilize instead the talonavicular joint and/or the subtalar joint based on stiffness.
After receiving treatment, participants will again perform the tests and measures in a random order, and will be allowed to rest as much as needed. The amount of time needed to rest between tests will be documented. Participants will return for 2 additional follow up visits between 7 to 10 days after the initial examination and measurements; however, they will only be asked to fill out the self-reported questionnaires and perform the tests and measures after the second treatment. Participants will then follow up between 7-10 days after their last manual therapy treatment for a final measurement of all tests and measures. Participants in the control group will be asked to follow-up at the same time points as the manual therapy group after their initial baseline measures and asked to complete all questionnaires and tests at the same time points as the manual therapy group. Subjects will be asked to avoid practicing balance and beginning exercises other than normal activities of daily living during this time.
Specific Aim 1: To evaluate if manual therapy improves range of motion, muscle stiffness, and in patients with ankle stiffness after ankle/hindfoot fractures more than a control group.
The dependent variables for Aim1 are weight bearing dorsiflexion range of motion (ROM), foot mobility, and muscle stiffness. The independent variables for Aim1 are treatment group (MT vs CONTROL) and time. The primary aim will be examined using a linear mixed model with repeated measures to account for the correlation among repeated observations from the same patient. Time (baseline, assessment 1 and assessment 2) and treatment group (MT and CONTROL) will be modeled as fixed effects, with the ALT as the primary dependent variable (DV). Separate models will be constructed in a similar fashion with foot mobility magnitude (FMM) and muscle stiffness as the DV. The hypothesis of interest will be the group-by-time interaction. Treatment effects will be calculated from the between-group differences in change score from baseline to assessment 1 and assessment 2.
Specific Aim 2: To evaluate if patients receiving three manual therapy treatments will have greater improvements in spatial and temporal gait parameters than a control group.
The dependent variables for Aim 2 are gait velocity and stance times. The independent variables for Aim 2 are treatment group (MT vs CONTROL) and time. The primary aim will be examined using a linear mixed model with repeated measures to account for the correlation among repeated observations from the same patient. Time (baseline, assessment 1 and assessment 2) and treatment group (MT and CONTROL) will be modeled as fixed effects, with gait velocity as the primary dependent variable (DV). A separate model will be constructed in a similar fashion with stance time as the DV. The hypothesis of interest will be the group-by-time interaction. Treatment effects will be calculated from the between-group differences in change score from baseline to assessment 1 and assessment 2.
Specific Aim 3: To evaluate if patients receiving three manual therapy treatments will have greater improvement in balance than a control group.
The dependent variables for Aim3 are distances reached on the star excursion balance test and single limb stance times. The independent variables for Aim3 are treatment group (MT vs CONTROL) and time. The primary aim will be examined using a linear mixed model with repeated measures to account for the correlation among repeated observations from the same patient. Time (baseline, assessment 1 and assessment 2) and treatment group (MT and Control) will be modeled as fixed effects, with distance reached for the star excursion balance test (SEBT) as the primary dependent variable (DV). A separate model will be constructed in a similar fashion with single limb stance time as the DV. The hypothesis of interest will be the group-by-time interaction. Treatment effects will be calculated from the between-group differences in change score from baseline to assessment 1 and assessment 2.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Manual Therapy Group | Experimental | Other: Manual Therapy GroupParticipants in the manual therapy group will receive 3 treatment sessions of joint mobilization based on the physical therapist's clinical decision making. |
| Control Group | Sham comparator | Other: Control GroupParticipants in the control group will receive a sham manual therapy treatment consisting of soft tissue mobilization and Grade I mobilizations at the proximal tib/fib joint. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 70 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Age 18-70 years
- Stiffness > 5.0 cm side to side difference as measured by the ankle lunge test
- Surgical management of ankle or hindfoot fracture
- Full weight-bearing (WB)
- Able to read and speak sufficient English to complete outcome tools
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Any prior foot/ankle surgery, deformity, or injury on the unaffected side which would affect gait, WB dorsiflexion or balance
- Unable to attend follow-up visits
- Any cognitive impairments which would prevents patients from being able to complete or understand questionnaires
- Have received any previous manual therapy for their current ankle and/or hindfoot fracture
- Have a known non/malunion
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Manual Therapy GroupThe manual therapy intervention will be based on the typed of fracture the patient sustained, and their limitations in joint mobility. | Other | Manual Therapy Group |
| Control GroupThe sham intervention will consist of soft tissue mobilization and Grade I mobilization at the proximal tib/fib joint. | Other | Control Group |
Primary outcome
Range of motion (ROM)
Time frame: 2 weeks
The dependent variable for Aim1 is weight bearing dorsiflexion ROM. The independent variables for Aim1 are treatment group (Manual therapy group versus Control group) and time
Spatial and temporal gait parameters - gait velocity
Time frame: 2 weeks
The dependent variable for Aim 2 is gait velocity. The independent variables for Aim 2 are treatment group (Manual therapy group versus Control group) and time.
Balance
Time frame: 2 weeks
The dependent variables for Aim3 is distances reached on the star excursion balance test. The independent variables for Aim3 are treatment group (Manual therapy group versus Control group) and time.
5 secondary outcomes
Characteristics that predict outcomes
Time frame: 2 weeks
Foot Mobility - Foot Assessment Platform (FAP)
Time frame: 2 weeks
Muscle Stiffness - MyotonPRO Device
Time frame: 2 weeks
Stance Time
Time frame: 2 weeks
Single Limb Stance Time
Time frame: 2 weeks
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Mar 2019.
- Results publication: PubMed 15566705van Tetering EA, Buckley RE. Functional outcome (SF-36) of patients with displaced calcaneal fractures compared to SF-36 normative data. Foot Ankle Int. 2004 Oct;25(10):733-8. doi: 10.1177/107110070402501007.
- Results publication: PubMed 25059747Griffin D, Parsons N, Shaw E, Kulikov Y, Hutchinson C, Thorogood M, Lamb SE; UK Heel Fracture Trial Investigators. Operative versus non-operative treatment for closed, displaced, intra-articular fractures of the calcaneus: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2014 Jul 24;349:g4483. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g4483.
- Results publication: PubMed 25373046Balazs GC, Polfer EM, Brelin AM, Gordon WT. High seas to high explosives: the evolution of calcaneus fracture management in the military. Mil Med. 2014 Nov;179(11):1228-35. doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-14-00156.
- Results publication: PubMed 12143985Schulze W, Richter J, Russe O, Ingelfinger P, Muhr G. Surgical treatment of talus fractures: a retrospective study of 80 cases followed for 1-15 years. Acta Orthop Scand. 2002 Jun;73(3):344-51. doi: 10.1080/000164702320155374.
- Results publication: PubMed 21075372Hirschmuller A, Konstantinidis L, Baur H, Muller S, Mehlhorn A, Kontermann J, Grosse U, Sudkamp NP, Helwig P. Do changes in dynamic plantar pressure distribution, strength capacity and postural control after intra-articular calcaneal fracture correlate with clinical and radiological outcome? Injury. 2011 Oct;42(10):1135-43. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.09.040. Epub 2010 Nov 13.
- Results publication: PubMed 15563389O'Brien J, Buckley R, McCormack R, Pate G, Leighton R, Petrie D, Galpin R. Personal gait satisfaction after displaced intraarticular calcaneal fractures: a 2-8 year followup. Foot Ankle Int. 2004 Sep;25(9):657-65. doi: 10.1177/107110070402500911.
- Results publication: PubMed 21959254Simondson D, Brock K, Cotton S. Reliability and smallest real difference of the ankle lunge test post ankle fracture. Man Ther. 2012 Feb;17(1):34-8. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2011.08.004. Epub 2011 Sep 29.
- Results publication: PubMed 22222143Chuang LL, Wu CY, Lin KC. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of myotonometric measurement of muscle tone, elasticity, and stiffness in patients with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Mar;93(3):532-40. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.09.014. Epub 2012 Jan 4.
- Results publication: PubMed 16596889Hertel J, Braham RA, Hale SA, Olmsted-Kramer LC. Simplifying the star excursion balance test: analyses of subjects with and without chronic ankle instability. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006 Mar;36(3):131-7. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2006.36.3.131.
- Results publication: PubMed 19267907McPoil TG, Vicenzino B, Cornwall MW, Collins N, Warren M. Reliability and normative values for the foot mobility magnitude: a composite measure of vertical and medial-lateral mobility of the midfoot. J Foot Ankle Res. 2009 Mar 6;2:6. doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-2-6.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Not planning on sharing data
Related trials for Ankle Fracture
Not yet recruiting
Biodegradable Magnesium Screws for Unstable Ankle Fracture Surgery
Ankle Fractures, Syndesmotic Injury
Recruiting
Investigating Auto Adjusting Dynamic AFO
Lower Limb; Fusion, Congenital, Lower Limb Fracture
Recruiting
Lateral Ankle Treatment
Avulsion Fracture
RecruitingObservational study
Use of Bioresorbable Magnesium Set Screws in Syndesmotic Injuries: a Pilot Study
Syndesmotic Injury, Trimalleolar Fracture
Not yet recruiting
Outpatient Floor Pedal Bike Utilization
Femur Fracture, Tibia Fracture
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Stephanie R Albin, DPT, FAAOMPT principal investigator
Intermountain Health Care
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Manual Therapy Group in people with Ankle Fracture and Calcaneus Fracture, run by Intermountain Health Care, Inc. at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 9 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Mar 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Range of motion (ROM) (time frame: 2 weeks). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02609347, which also lists 10 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 13 Mar 2019.