3 research outputs found

    Foot orthoses for flexible flatfeet in children and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-reported outcomes

    Get PDF
    Background This systematic review and meta-analysis examined the effectiveness of orthoses for flexible flatfeet in terms of patient-reported outcomes in children and adults. Methods EMBASE, Medline (OvidSP), Web-of-Science, Scopus, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, i.e., Cochrane Central and Pubmed were searched to identify relevant studies since their inception up to February 2021. We included randomized controlled trials (RCT) and prospective studies in which patient reported outcomes at baseline and follow-up in an orthoses group were compared with a no orthoses or sham sole group. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) and the Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). A meta-analysis was performed where there were multiple studies with the same outcome measures, which was the case for the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain in adults. Results In total nine studies were included: four RCT in children (N = 353) and four RCT and one prospective study in adults (N = 268) were included. There was considerable heterogeneity between studies. A meta-analysis demonstrated that pain reduction between baseline and follow-up was significantly larger in the orthoses (N = 167) than in the control groups in adults (N = 157; - 4.76, 95% CI [- 9.46, - 0.06], p0.05). Conclusion Due to heterogeneity in study designs, we cannot conclude that foot orthoses are useful for flexible flatfoot in children and adults. However, based on the meta-analysis orthoses might be useful in decreasing pain in adults. The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work

    The role of patient characteristics and the effects of angiogenic therapies on the microvasculature of the meniscus: A systematic review

    No full text
    Background: Considerable interindividual variation in meniscal microvascularization has been reported. The purpose of this review was to identify which patient characteristics affect meniscal microvascularization and provide a structured overview of angiogenic ther-apies that influence meniscal neovascularization.Methods: A systematic literature search was undertaken using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane library and Emcare from inception to November 2021. Studies reporting on (1) Patient characteristics that affect meniscal microvascularization, or (2) Therapies that induce neovascularization in meniscal tissue were included. Studies were graded in quality using the Anatomical Quality Assessment (AQUA) tool. The study was registered with PROSPERO(ID:CRD42021242479).Results: Thirteen studies reported on patient characteristics and eleven on angiogenic ther-apies. The influence of Age, Degenerative knee, Gender, and Race was reported. Age is the most studied factor. The entire meniscus is vascularized around birth. With increasing age, vascularization decreases from the inner to the peripheral margin. Around 11 years, blood vessels are primarily located in the peripheral third of the menisci. There seems to be a fur-ther decrease in vascularization with increasing age in adults, yet conflicting literature exists. Degenerative changes of the knee also seem to influence meniscal vascularization, but evidence is limited. Angiogenic therapies to improve meniscal vascularization have only been studied in preclinical setting. The use of synovial flap transplantation, stem cell therapy, vascular endothelial growth factor, and angiogenin has shown promising results.Conclusion: To decrease failure rates of meniscal repair, a better understanding of patient -specific vascular anatomy is essential. Translational clinical research is needed to investi-gate the clinical value of angiogenic therapies.(c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).Orthopaedics, Trauma Surgery and Rehabilitatio

    Validity and reliability of the adapted Dutch version of the Brace Questionnaire (BrQ)

    Get PDF
    Background and purpose: The Brace Questionnaire (BrQ) is a disease-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instrument for measuring perceived health status of scoliosis patients undergoing brace treatment. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the validity and reliability of a translated and culturally adapted Dutch version of the BrQ. Patients and methods: The original Greek BrQ was translated into Dutch and a cross-cultural adaptation and validation processes were conducted. Subsequently, 80 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients undergoing active brace treatment were included from 4 scoliosis centers to evaluate the validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the BrQ. The questionnaire’s floor and ceiling effects, internal consistency, and test–retest reliability were assessed. Concurrent validity was evaluated by comparing the BrQ with the revised Scoliosis Research Society 22-item questionnaire (SRS-22r) scores. Results: The mean total BrQ score was 75.9 (standard deviation [SD] 11.3) and the mean domain scores varied between 3.4 (SD 0.9) and 4.2 (SD 0.7) for the domains “vitality” and “bodily pain,” respectively. There were no floor and ceiling effects for the total BrQ score. The BrQ showed satisfactory internal consistency in most subdomains with a Cronbach’s α ranging between 0.35 for the domain “general health perception” and 0.89 for the domain “self-esteem and aesthetics.” Excellent test–retest reproducibility was observed for the total BrQ score (ICC 0.91), and the BrQ was successfully validated against the SRS-22r. Conclusion: The translated and culturally adapted Dutch version of the BrQ is a valid and reliable HRQOL instrument for AIS patients undergoing brace treatment
    corecore