Skip to content

User Satisfaction of Customised 3D Printed Ankle-Foot Orthosis in Comparison to Thermoformed Ankle-Foot Orthosis for Patients With Neurological Conditions: A Preliminary Study

User Satisfaction of Customised 3D Printed Ankle-Foot Orthosis in Comparison to Thermoformed Ankle-Foot Orthosis for Patients With Neurological Conditions: A Preliminary Study

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05122949
Enrollment
5
Registered
2021-11-17
Start date
2017-11-03
Completion date
2018-08-22
Last updated
2021-11-17

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

Conditions

Nerve Palsy, Spinal Cord Injuries, Stroke

Keywords

3D print, Digitisation, Ankle-foot orthosis, user satisfaction

Brief summary

Study Design and Subject Recruitment: This was a cross-sectional study in a single centre outpatient setting at the Foot Care and Limb Design Centre, Tan Tock Seng Hospital. As this was a proof-of-concept clinical trial for the introduction of 3D printed AFOs as a patient service, only 5 subjects were recruited based on consecutive sampling. Interventions: Thermoformed AFOs moulded over the subject's lower limb plaster model served as the control intervention. The plaster models were rectified by an orthotist with over 20 years of experience and the AFO design was determined according to the subject's clinical presentation and needs. The AFOs were manufactured from 4 - 5mm thick homopolymer polypropylene. 3D printed AFOs served as the treatment intervention. It was fabricated through 3D scanning with an Artec Eva 3D scanner (Artec 3D, Luxembourg, Luxembourg) and an adjustable Perspex glass foot plate, CAD modelling with the OrtenShape software (Proteor, Saint-Apollinaire, France), and printed using fused deposition modelling with the Fortus 450mc (Stratasys, Minnesota, United States). The 3D printed AFO is printed of Polyamide Nylon-12 material in the same thickness as the thermoformed AFO. There were no blinding procedures as both interventions were distinctly different and it is not possible to blind subjects with daily use of the AFOs. Trial Schedule: A thermoformed and a 3D printed AFO were fitted to each subject in a single session. The QUEST survey was administered post-fitting. Subjects brought home both AFOs and were instructed to wear them during ambulation, alternating between the AFOs daily. Subjects returned for follow-up at 3 weeks and 6 weeks post-fitting for necessary adjustments and the administration of the QUEST surveys was repeated for each AFO.

Interventions

DEVICE3D Printed Ankle-Foot Orthosis

3D Printed (Fused Deposition Modelling) Ankle-Foot Orthosis with Polyamide Nylon-12 material

DEVICEThermoformed Ankle-Foot Orthosis

Thermoformed Ankle-Foot Orthosis with homopolymer polypropylene

Sponsors

Tan Tock Seng Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
21 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Existing patients of the centre, * Clinical need for an AFO due to neurological disorders.

Exclusion criteria

* Cognitive impairment * Lower limb volume fluctuations * Severe foot/ ankle varus or valgus deformities * Lower limb contractures of over 10° * Non-community ambulators

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Change in Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) scoresBaseline, 3 weeks follow-up and 6 weeks follow-upQUEST 2.0 comprises of 12 items, with 8 items related to user satisfaction with assistive devices and 4 service-related items. Responses for the QUEST items were based on a 5-level response scale, with 1 - Not satisfied at all; 2 - Not very satisfied; 3 - More or less satisfied; 4 - Quite satisfied; and 5 - Very satisfied.

Countries

Singapore

Outcome results

None listed

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