Panacea Index Logo

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...

Effect of motion control versus neutral walking footwear on pain associated with lateral tibiofemoral joint osteoarthritis: a comparative effectiveness randomised clinical trial.

BMJ open
January 1, 1970
Kade L Paterson et al. (7 authors)
Journal ArticleRandomized Controlled TrialResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tHuman StudyClinical
Study Details

Study Goal

To determine if motion control walking shoes are superior to neutral walking shoes in reducing knee pain on walking in people with lateral knee osteoarthritis.

Results Summary

The study found no evidence that motion control shoes were superior to neutral shoes for reducing knee pain or improving secondary outcomes. Adverse events were minor and similar between groups.

Population

People with symptomatic radiographic lateral tibiofemoral osteoarthritis from the community and a volunteer database.

Effective Dosage

Wear shoes >6 hours/day

Duration

6 months

Interactions

None mentioned

Extracted Claims (4)
InterventionDirectionEndpointPopulationDosageImpactClaim #
motion control walking shoes
no change
knee pain on walking
people with lateral knee osteoarthritis (OA)
-
were not superior to neutral shoes in reducing
#1
motion control shoes
no change
pain
people with symptomatic radiographic lateral tibiofemoral OA
mean between-group difference 0.4 NRS units, 95% CI -1.0 to 1.7
were not superior to neutral shoes for
#2
motion control shoes
no change
any secondary outcome
people with symptomatic radiographic lateral tibiofemoral OA
-
were not superior to neutral shoes for
#3
motion control shoes
no change
knee pain on walking
people with symptomatic radiographic lateral tibiofemoral joint OA
-
were not superior to neutral shoes in improving
#4
Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine if motion control walking shoes are superior to neutral walking shoes in reducing knee pain on walking in people with lateral knee osteoarthritis (OA). DESIGN: Participant-blinded and assessor-blinded, comparative effectiveness, superiority randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: People with symptomatic radiographic lateral tibiofemoral OA from the community and our volunteer database. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomised to receive either motion control or neutral shoes and advised to wear them >6 hours/day over 6 months. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in average knee pain on walking over the previous week (11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), 0-10) at 6 months. The secondary outcomes included other measures of knee pain, physical function, quality of life, participant-perceived change in pain and function, and physical activity. RESULTS: We planned to recruit 110 participants (55 per arm) but ceased recruitment at 40 (n=18 motion control shoes, n=22 neutral shoes) due to COVID-19-related impacts. All 40 participants completed 6-month outcomes. There was no evidence that motion control shoes were superior to neutral shoes for the primary outcome of pain (mean between-group difference 0.4 NRS units, 95% CI -1.0 to 1.7) nor for any secondary outcome. The number of participants experiencing any adverse events was similar between groups (motion control shoes: n=5, 28%; neutral shoes: n=4, 18.2%) and were minor. CONCLUSIONS: Motion control shoes were not superior to neutral shoes in improving knee pain on walking in symptomatic radiographic lateral tibiofemoral joint OA. Further research is needed to identify effective treatments in this important but under-researched knee OA subgroup. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618001864213.

Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
COVID-19HumansOsteoarthritis, KneePainQuality of LifeShoesTreatment OutcomeWalking
Study Links
Quality Scores
Safety85
Efficacy30/10
Quality75/10
Citation Metrics
Total Citations3
Citations/Year1.0
Relative Citation Ratio0.52
NIH Percentile28.1%
Research Impact Scores
APT Score0.50
Weight Score1.46
Normalized Score0.61
Related Supplements