Orthopedic Disorder
Conditions
Brief summary
The primary purpose of this study is to conduct a multi-site clinical trial of the Recovery Force Movement and Compressions (RF MAC) System. The study is a randomized comparative study of DVT prophylaxis using either standard IPC (Group 1) or the RF MAC system (Group 2) in 300 patients after TJR surgery at two study sites: Tufts Medical Center (Boston, Massachusetts) and Eskenazi Hospital (Indianapolis, Indiana). This study is funded by a Phase II SBIR awarded to Recovery Force from the National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (R44-HL132624-02).
Detailed description
DVT is the most feared complication of total joint replacement (TJR), with more than 300,000 total hip and 700,000 total knee replacements performed annually in the U.S. Current recommendations for postoperative DVT prophylaxis after TJR include anti-coagulant medications and/or intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) of the lower limb for a minimum of 10-14 days. Most current IPC devices are non-mobile, making early postoperative mobility, which is especially important in TJR patients, cumbersome and time-consuming. Upon hospital discharge, most patients go home on pharmacologic DVT prophylaxis. Even when at-home external compression therapy is prescribed (IPC or compression stockings), data suggests compliance rates as low as 10-50%. Recovery Force (RF) has produced the next generation of mechanical DVT prophylaxis, with a mobile device absent of tubes and pumps, stays in place during ambulation, is lightweight and comfortable for continuous wear, and is designed to improve compliance with recommended use. The hypothesis for Phase II is that IPC using the RF1400 will result in improved compliance, support early mobility and result in significantly higher functional mobility after TJR as compared to standard of care. The research team will conduct a randomized comparative study of DVT prophylaxis using either standard IPC (Group 1) or the RF1400 (Group 2) in 300 patients after TJR surgery. Dr. Karen Giuliano of the University of Massachusetts Amherst will serve as the overall PI for efforts associated with the study sites. This study will include an inpatient phase and an outpatient phase with patients at two clinical sites: Tufts Medical Center and Indiana University School of Medicine, with each site enrolling 150 patients (75 control/75 experimental). The overall goal of Phase II is to demonstrate that compliance with perscribed use, comfort, and ease-of-use is significantly higher with the RF1400 than with DVT prophylaxis using either standard IPC (in-hospital) or standard-of-care (at-home) in preparation for full commercialization in the TJR market during Phase III. The DVT therapy market is expected to hit $3.8B by 2021, and the US accounts for over 50% of the global market. With the current risk of bleeding from anticoagulant DVT prophylaxis at 5.6%, the commercial impact of this research is that improved patient compliance with the RF1400 DVT prophylaxis will improve postoperative mobility and provide an effective alternative to anticoagulation.
Interventions
The RF Health MAC is a novel device that is applied to the lower legs of patients that provides intermittent active compressions to the calf muscles which results in increased blood flow in the veins, moving blood towards the direction of the heart and reducing the risk of clot formation.
Sponsors
Study design
Intervention model description
This study will have 2 groups, intervention (RF MAC-group 2) and control (usual care for DVT prevention and mobility-group 1) in postoperative total joint replacement patients at two hospitals.
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* adult patients (age 40-85) * first elective total hip replacement (THR) or first or second (opposite knee) elective total knee replacement (TKA * speak English * expected to have a hospital stay of two days or less * discharge to home from hospital (not a rehabilitation facility) * must be able to perform self-care * BMI between 18 and 39 * calf circumference between 11 and 24.5 inches
Exclusion criteria
* partial joint replacement, TJR revisions, emergency surgeries * calf deformities that would not allow proper fit for external compression device * non-ambulatory * clinically malnourished or frail/deconditioned * vulnerable patients (pregnant women, prisoners, homeless and cognitively impaired) * do not speak English
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Compliance to Prescribed Use | day 1 postoperative joint replacement | Compare patient compliance (percentage of prescribed use/24hr) between the standard of care sequential compression device and the Recovery Force Mobility and Compression (MAC) system in a group of total joint replacement patients. |
| Patient-reported Comfort | at the end of 14-day data collection period | Compare patient-reported comfort (patient reported outcomes in the hospital-standard of care vs RF MAC-for overall comfort, where higher score is better device performance (5-pt Likert Scale; 1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree) between the standard of care sequential compression device and the Recovery Force Mobility and Compression (MAC) system in a group of total joint replacement patients. |
| Patient-reported Ease-of-use | at the end of 14-day data collection period | Compare patient-reported ease-of-use (using the System Usability Scale, with a range of 0-21, where higher score =higher ease of use) between the standard of care sequential compression device and the Recovery Force Mobility and Compression (MAC) system in a group of total joint replacement patients. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Standard of Care Participants received DVT prophylaxis using standard intermittent pneumatic compression during postoperative care after total joint replacement. | 49 |
| Recovery Force MAC Participants received DVT prophylaxis using the RF Health MAC during postoperative care after total joint replacement.
RF Health MAC: The RF Health MAC is a novel device that is applied to the lower legs of patients that provides intermittent active compressions to the calf muscles which results in increased blood flow in the veins, moving blood towards the direction of the heart and reducing the risk of clot formation. | 57 |
| Total | 106 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Recovery Force MAC | Total | Standard of Care |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 28 Participants | 47 Participants | 19 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 29 Participants | 59 Participants | 30 Participants |
| Age, Continuous | 64.4 years | 64.0 years | 63.6 years |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 57 Participants | 106 Participants | 49 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 0 Participants | 0 Participants | 0 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 57 participants | 106 participants | 49 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 29 Participants | 53 Participants | 24 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 28 Participants | 53 Participants | 25 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 49 | 0 / 57 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 0 / 49 | 0 / 57 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 49 | 0 / 57 |
Outcome results
Compliance to Prescribed Use
Compare patient compliance (percentage of prescribed use/24hr) between the standard of care sequential compression device and the Recovery Force Mobility and Compression (MAC) system in a group of total joint replacement patients.
Time frame: day 1 postoperative joint replacement
Population: Percent Compliance for Day 1 postop
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard of Care | Compliance to Prescribed Use | 67.7 percentage of prescribed use/24hr | Standard Deviation 40.1 |
| Recovery Force MAC | Compliance to Prescribed Use | 83.3 percentage of prescribed use/24hr | Standard Deviation 25.8 |
Patient-reported Comfort
Compare patient-reported comfort (patient reported outcomes in the hospital-standard of care vs RF MAC-for overall comfort, where higher score is better device performance (5-pt Likert Scale; 1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree) between the standard of care sequential compression device and the Recovery Force Mobility and Compression (MAC) system in a group of total joint replacement patients.
Time frame: at the end of 14-day data collection period
Population: Patient reported outcomes in the hospital (Standard of care vs RF MAC) for overall comfort, where higher score is better device performance (5-pt Likert Scale; 1=Strongly disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree).
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard of Care | Patient-reported Comfort | 3.1 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.5 |
| Recovery Force MAC | Patient-reported Comfort | 3.5 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.3 |
Patient-reported Ease-of-use
Compare patient-reported ease-of-use (using the System Usability Scale, with a range of 0-21, where higher score =higher ease of use) between the standard of care sequential compression device and the Recovery Force Mobility and Compression (MAC) system in a group of total joint replacement patients.
Time frame: at the end of 14-day data collection period
Population: Patient reported ease-of-use (using the System Usability Scale, with a range of 0-21, where higher score =higher ease of use) between the standard of care sequential compression device and the Recovery Force Mobility and Compression (MAC) system in a group of total joint replacement patients.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard of Care | Patient-reported Ease-of-use | 2.6 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.4 |
| Recovery Force MAC | Patient-reported Ease-of-use | 2.3 units on a scale | Standard Deviation 0.3 |