Foot Drop
Conditions
Brief summary
The objective of this research is to compare the new ankle foot orthosis (AFO) with prior support developed by Turbomed, with the AFO with posterior support from Turbomed as well as two competing AFOs currently on the market. With this research, we seek to answer the following questions: * Is the new AFO as biomechanically efficient as the AFOs currently on the market? * Is the new AFO more comfortable than the AFO currently on the market? * Is the new AFO easier to put on and attach than the AFOs currently on the market?
Interventions
New ankle foot orthosis with anterior support developed by Turbomed
Ankle foot orthosis with anterior support from Turbomed
Ankle foot orthosis with posterior support from competitor 1
Ankle foot orthosis with posterior support from competitor 2
Sponsors
Study design
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Foot drop following surgery or an accident (functional calf, without contracture and not spastic) * Foot drop following a Cerebral Vascular Accident (with or without spasticity, mild to moderate) * Ability to stand and walk alone without technical assistance * Ability to communicate comfort/discomfort
Exclusion criteria
* Sore to one of the feet
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Easy to put on orthosis | At delivery | Easy to put on is measured with a Likert scale from 1 (very difficult) to 5 (very easy). |
| Knee flexion angle during gait | At delivery | Maximum, minimum and range of motion of the knee flexion angle during gait. |
| Hip flexion angle during gait | At delivery | Maximum, minimum and range of motion of the hip flexion angle during gait. |
| Minimum foot clearance | At delivery | Minimum foot clearance is defined as the minimum distance between the foot and the ground during swing. |
| Comfort of participants with orthosis | At delivery | Comfort is measured with a Likert scale from 1 (not comfortable) to 5 (very comfortable). |
Countries
Canada