Skip to content

Thoracolumbar Burstfractures, Orthesis or No Orthesis

Thoracolumbar Burstfractures, Orthesis or no Orthesis

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Phase 4
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02784782
Acronym
BONO
Enrollment
122
Registered
2016-05-27
Start date
2016-03-31
Completion date
2019-07-31
Last updated
2016-05-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Spinal Fractures

Keywords

Spinal, Vertebral, Burstfracture, Orthesis, Brace, Thoracolumbar

Brief summary

Rationale: Thoracolumbar burst fractures are frequently seen in the trauma population, they have a large impact on patient's wellbeing and are a large economic burden to society. Thoracolumbar burst fractures might not need the standard care of brace immobilization for adequate treatment and a functional treatment might lead to same or better functional outcomes. Besides that, with functional outcome length of hospital stay might decrease and it might also be cost effective compared to bracing. Objective: The investigators aim to study the use of braces for thoracolumbar burstfractures, not only by measuring the functional scores and the effect of the bracing or functional treatment on the increase in kyphosis angle, but also on (health related) quality of life and health economics. The investigators hypothesize that no treatment is superior over one other. Study design: This project is a randomised controlled trial comparing brace and no brace treatment on function, kyphosis angle, pain, quality of life, and costs. Study population: Patients between 18 and 65, with a single level thoracolumbar burst fracture will be included. The fracture has to have a kyphosis angle of less than 35 degrees and patient has to be neurologically intact. Patients are excluded when they are overweight (BMI\> 35), need multidisciplinary treatment due to multitrauma, or have inadequate knowledge of the Dutch language. Patients included in the brace group will automatically take part in a brace compliance study. Intervention: One group receives a Thoracolumbar Sacral Orthesis (TLSO) for 6 weeks, the other group receives no TLSO Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary outcome of this study is the functional score at six months after trauma. Secondary outcomes are pain, kyphosis angle, health related quality of life, healthcare costs and brace compliance. Literature shows no difference in pain, functional outcome or kyphosis angle, therefore no potential risks are known comparing a brace and a functional treatment. Investigators aim that not using the TLSO results in similar functional outcome, pain and kyphosis angle, and less costs. Patients will be seen at first presentation and during two year follow up at the outpatient clinic at six standard care follow up moments. At these follow up moments a X-ray as part of standard care is made. At or just before each scheduled appointment they will fill in questionnaires taking from 15-45 minutes.

Detailed description

No extra information

Interventions

DEVICEOrthesis
BEHAVIORALNo orthesis

Sponsors

ZonMw: The Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development
CollaboratorOTHER
Elisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Th10-L4 * AO foundation type A3 or A4 type fractures * Single level * Kyphosis \< 35 ° at first analysis * Neurologically intact * Adequate trauma

Exclusion criteria

* Inadequate knowledge of the Dutch language * Multitrauma, which asks for multidisciplinary treatment * Inability to wear a brace due to overweight (BMI\> 35) * Known osteoporosis

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Functional scoreat six months, measured up to two yearsOswestry Disability Index (ODI) derived from the Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire used to quantify disability for low back pain. The self-completed questionnaire contains ten topics concerning intensity of pain, lifting, ability to care for oneself, ability to walk, ability to sit, sexual function, ability to stand, social life, sleep quality, and ability to travel. Each topic category is followed by 6 statements describing different potential scenarios in the patient's life relating to the topic. The patient then checks the statement which most closely resembles their situation. Each question is scored on a scale of 0-5 with the first statement being zero and indicating the least amount of disability and the last statement is scored 5 indicating most severe disability. The scores for all questions answered are summed, then multiplied by two to obtain the index (range 0 to 100). Zero is equated with no disability and 100 is the maximum disability possible.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Quality of life scoreup to two yearsWHOQOL-BREF is the short version of the WHOQOL 100 and is recommended for use when time is restricted or the burden on the respondent needs to be minimized. This survey has been used in large epidemiological studies and clinical trials. A self-report questionnaire that contains 26 items and addresses 4 QOL domains: physical health (7), psychological health (6), social relationships (3) and environment (8). Two other items measure overall QOL and general health. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale (low score of 1 to high score of 5) to determine a raw item score. Subsequently, the mean score for each domain is calculated, resulting in a mean score per domain that is between 4 and 20. Finally, this mean domain score is then multiplied by 4 in order to transform the domain score into a scaled score, with a higher score indicating a higher QOL. When transformed by multiplying x4, each domain score is then comparable with the scores used in the original WHOQOL-100.
Patient reported health statusup to two yearsThe Short Form (SF 36) Health Survey is a 36-item, patient-reported survey of patient health. The SF-36 is a measure of health status and an abbreviated variant of it, the SF-6D, is commonly used in health economics as a variable in the quality-adjusted life year calculation to determine the cost-effectiveness of a health treatment. The SF-36 consists of eight scaled scores, which are the weighted sums of the questions in their section. Each scale is directly transformed into a 0-100 scale on the assumption that each question carries equal weight. The lower the score the more disability. The higher the score the less disability i.e., a score of zero is equivalent to maximum disability and a score of 100 is equivalent to no disability.
Painup to two yearsVisual Analogue Scale-pain (VAS) is a psychometric response scale which can be used in questionnaires. It is a measurement instrument for subjective characteristics or attitudes that cannot be directly measured. When responding to a VAS item, respondents specify their level of agreement to a statement, in this study pain, by indicating a position along a continuous line between two end-points.
Productivity costsup to two yearsThe Productivity Cost Questionnaire (iPCQ) is a generic non-disease specific questionnaire and is applicable to national and international studies. Currently a Dutch version and an English version of the iPCQ are available. Both indirect cost due to absenteeism as the productivity losses due to presenteeism (i.e. sick, but working) are taken into account. Different methods exist to value productivity. The human-capital method takes the patient's perspective and counts any hour not worked as an hour lost. By contrast, the friction-cost method takes the employer's perspective, and only counts as lost those hours not worked until another employee takes over the patient's work. By applying wage costs the results of the iPCQ can be monetized and as such used in health economic evaluations.
Work Abilityup to two yearsTo gain more insight in the effects of a post-trauma status on patients work ability the Work Ability Questionnaire can be used. Originally, the work ability questionnaire consists of 7 dimensions . Recently, it was shown that a very strong association exists between the total Work ability Index (WAI)-score and score on a single-item question (i.e. Current work ability compared with the lifetime best) among all participants. Both the WAI and the single-item question showed similar patterns of associations with sick leave, health, and symptoms. The predictive value for the degree of sick leave and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was strong for both the WAI and the single-item question. So, it suggests that the single-item question on work ability could be used as a simple indicator for assessing the status and progress of work ability in a working population. Considering the extensive questionnaire being used in the proposed study the single-item questions seems more favourable.
Medical Consumptionup to two yearsThe Institute for Medical Technology (iMTA) Medical Consumption Questionnaire (iMCQ), is a generic non disease specific instrument for measuring (direct) medical costs. The instrument is a standardized self-reported questionnaire. The iMCQ includes questions related to frequently occurring contacts with health care providers and can be complemented with extra questions that are relevant for specific study populations. A manual is available for a structured use of the questionnaire. Cost-prices be applied to the obtained healthcare utilization by the iMCQ by using the Dutch manual for cost-analyses that is written by iMTA on behalf of the Dutch Healthcare Institute.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Length of hospital stayFrom first admission until discharge from the hospital up to 10 weeksThe amount of days spent in the hospital

Countries

Netherlands

Contacts

Primary ContactWouter Bakker, drs.
bono@etz.nl+31135392942
Backup ContactJoyce Brust
j.brust@etz.nl+316-30346051

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026