Skip to content

Orthofeet: A Prospective Proof of Concept Trial to Evaluate an Innovative Pain Relief Footwear

Orthofeet: A Prospective Proof of Concept Trial to Evaluate Efficacy, Acceptability, and Perception of Benefit of an Innovative Pain Relief Footwear

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 1Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT05434078
Enrollment
50
Registered
2022-06-27
Start date
2022-07-18
Completion date
2024-08-30
Last updated
2024-12-24

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

Conditions

Foot Pain

Keywords

foot pain, falls, frailty, footwear, mobility

Brief summary

The purpose of this prospective randomized crossover study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a new pain relief footwear, Orthofeet, in reducing foot pain and improving daily physical activity. The investigators hypothesize that wearing Orthofeet shoes will lead to a reduction in foot pain, resulting in increased daily physical activity, objectively measured using validated wearable devices.

Detailed description

A clinical study at Baylor College of Medicine is being conducted to evaluate the short- and intermediate-term benefits and effectiveness of a novel pain relief footwear, Orthofeet. This 12-week randomized crossover trial aims to recruit 50 eligible ambulatory adults (aged 50 years or older) with moderate self-reported foot pain. Participants will be randomly assigned to Group AB (25 subjects) or Group BA (25 subjects), with no differences in assessments or eligibility criteria between the groups. In Group AB, participants will wear Orthofeet shoes for 6 weeks, followed by their own shoes for another 6 weeks, while Group BA will follow the reverse order. Pain and function, the primary outcomes, will be measured using the Foot Function Index (FFI), and acceptability will be assessed using a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) questionnaire. Data will be collected at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks.

Interventions

DEVICEOrthofeet Shoes

Participants will wear a pair of Orthofeet shoes to wear for 6 weeks

Sponsors

Orthofeet, Inc.
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Bijan Najafi, PhD
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
CROSSOVER
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
50 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

* 50 years or older * self reported foot pain including heel, arch, or ball of foot

Exclusion criteria

* Plantar ulcer Patients with major foot deformity (e.g., Charcot foot, Pes Cavus) * Lower extremity amputation including minor amputation. Foot pain because of nail disorder or keratotic lesions (e.g. corns, calluses) * unstable conditions such as recent stroke, anticipated changes in medication regime * Acute fractures of the foot * Non-ambulatory or unable to stand without help or walk a distance of at least 6 feet without assistance. * major cognitive impairment or major depression

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Foot Pain at Its Worst at Baseline and Week 6baseline, week 6Changes in foot pain from baseline to 6 weeks for each intervention (Orthofeet and own shoes) will be assessed using the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire. The FFI consists of four overall scores, including three subscales: 1) Pain Score (the primary outcome in this study), 2) Disability Score, 3) Activity Limitation Score, and 4) Overall Score. The Pain subscale asks participants to rate their foot pain on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain), based on their experiences during various activities over the past two weeks. For this outcome, we focused on the FFI pain subscore related to the worst foot pain experienced over the last two weeks. To report the final results, participants from intervention A (Orthofeet) and intervention B (own shoes) were combined from groups AB and BA.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Daily Energy Expenditurefrom baseline to 6 weeksActive kilocalories (calories burned through physical activity, excluding basal metabolic rate) measured by the smartwatch (Vivosmart watch, Garmin) over the last seven consecutive days were extracted for each intervention period: A (Orthofeet) and B (own shoes). The 90th percentile of daily active kilocalories recorded by the smartwatch from baseline to 6 weeks was included in the analysis.
Pain Score at Baseline and Week 6baseline, week 6Foot pain at baseline and 6 weeks for each intervention (Orthofeet and own shoes) will be assessed using the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire. The pain subscale asks participants to rate their foot pain on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain) based on their experiences during various activities over the past two weeks. Seven of the nine questions were summed for final analysis, excluding pain walking with orthotics and pain standing with orthotics, as the focus was to compare Orthofeet shoes to participants' own shoes, not prescribed orthoses. The resulting total score ranges from 0 to 70, with higher values indicating worse overall pain.
Step Countfrom baseline to 6 weeksStep count will be measured over the course of 6 weeks for each intervention arm (Intervention A (Orthofeet) and Intervention B (own shoes)) using a smartwatch (Vivosmart 4, Garmin, USA). Steps per day were recorded in 15-min intervals and summed over each 24-h period. For analysis, the mean daily steps from the last seven consecutive days of each footwear condition (A and B) were calculated for each participant.
Physical Activity Limitationbaseline, week 6Physical activity limitations at baseline and were assessed using the Activity Limitation subscale of the Foot Function Index (FFI). This subscale comprises five items that evaluate the extent to which foot problems restrict a person's physical activities, including walking distances, standing on tiptoe, climbing stairs, and engaging in vigorous activities. Each item is rated on a scale from 0 (no limitation) to 10 (maximum limitation), with higher scores indicating greater activity limitation. The total score for this subscale ranges from 0 to 50. In this study, changes from baseline at week 6 for each intervention duration were assessed and reported. In this study the changes from baseline at week 6 for each intervention duration was assessed and reported
Daily Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METS)6 weeksWe used a Garmin smartwatch to report the Daily Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METs). Median daily MET values over the last seven consecutive days for each participant, during each footwear condition (Orthofeet shoes and their own shoes), were calculated following the guidelines of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and the American Heart Association (AHA) (Haskell et al., 2007). To calculate MET-minutes per week (MET·min·wk-¹), the median daily METs were multiplied by 60, as recommended by ACSM and AHA. The mean values for the calculated Median daily MET across all participants, during periods when they wore Orthofeet shoes and their own shoes, were computed and reported.
Disability at Baseline and Week 6baseline, week 6The disability level at baseline and week 6 was assessed using the disability subscale of the Foot Function Index (FFI). This subscale consists of nine items that evaluate the difficulty experienced in performing various functional activities due to foot problems. These activities include walking inside and outside the house, climbing and descending stairs, getting out of a chair, standing on tiptoe, climbing curbs, and running or fast walking. Each item is rated on a scale from 0 (no difficulty) to 10 (so difficult it requires help). The scores for the disability subscale range from 0 to 90, with higher scores indicating greater disability.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Participants were recruited from the Baylor Outpatient Clinic (Houston, Texas, USA) via electronic health records, peer referrals, study flyers, and from among participants in prior clinical studies who had agreed to be contacted for new studies. This trial's timeline started at the initial recruitment date of of the firts participant on July 18th, 2022, and concluded at the final follow-up date of August 30th, 2023

Participants by arm

ArmCount
OrthoFeet Shoes First, Then Own Shoes
Group AB (OrthoFeet Shoes first, then Own Shoes) started with 6-week Intervention A (OrthoFeet) and then switched to 6-week intervention B (own shoes)
22
Own Shoes First, Then OrthoFeet Shoes
Group BA (Own Shoes first, then OrthoFeet Shoes) started with B (own shoes) for 6 weeks and then switched to Intervention A (OrthoFeet) for the same duration
24
Total46

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up21
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject10

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicOwn Shoes First, Then OrthoFeet ShoesTotalOrthoFeet Shoes First, Then Own Shoes
Age, Continuous66 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5
65 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5
65 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 5
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
1 Participants3 Participants2 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
23 Participants43 Participants20 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
History of fall6 Participants11 Participants5 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
24 participants46 participants22 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
20 Participants38 Participants18 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
4 Participants8 Participants4 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 460 / 46
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 460 / 46
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 460 / 46

Outcome results

Primary

Foot Pain at Its Worst at Baseline and Week 6

Changes in foot pain from baseline to 6 weeks for each intervention (Orthofeet and own shoes) will be assessed using the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire. The FFI consists of four overall scores, including three subscales: 1) Pain Score (the primary outcome in this study), 2) Disability Score, 3) Activity Limitation Score, and 4) Overall Score. The Pain subscale asks participants to rate their foot pain on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain), based on their experiences during various activities over the past two weeks. For this outcome, we focused on the FFI pain subscore related to the worst foot pain experienced over the last two weeks. To report the final results, participants from intervention A (Orthofeet) and intervention B (own shoes) were combined from groups AB and BA.

Time frame: baseline, week 6

Population: This study uses a crossover design. Please note that Intervention A comprises data from the first six weeks of Group AB and the last six weeks of Group BA, while Intervention B comprises data from the last six weeks of Group AB and the first six weeks of Group BA. Consequently, the total number of participants is the sum of Group AB and Group BA, which is identical for both Intervention A and Intervention B. Four subjects (out of 50) were lost in follow-up

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OrthoFeet ShoesFoot Pain at Its Worst at Baseline and Week 6Baseline6.4 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 2.7
OrthoFeet ShoesFoot Pain at Its Worst at Baseline and Week 6week 63.6 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 2.8
Own ShoesFoot Pain at Its Worst at Baseline and Week 6Baseline5.3 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 3.2
Own ShoesFoot Pain at Its Worst at Baseline and Week 6week 65.4 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 2.9
Secondary

Daily Energy Expenditure

Active kilocalories (calories burned through physical activity, excluding basal metabolic rate) measured by the smartwatch (Vivosmart watch, Garmin) over the last seven consecutive days were extracted for each intervention period: A (Orthofeet) and B (own shoes). The 90th percentile of daily active kilocalories recorded by the smartwatch from baseline to 6 weeks was included in the analysis.

Time frame: from baseline to 6 weeks

Population: Data from twenty-nine participants (out of 46 recruited) with valid physical activity monitoring during both sequences-A (Orthofeet shoes) and B (own shoes)-were included in this secondary analysis. Data from the remaining participants were excluded due to invalid physical activity records.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OrthoFeet ShoesDaily Energy Expenditure532 Kcal/dayStandard Deviation 119
Own ShoesDaily Energy Expenditure354 Kcal/dayStandard Deviation 56
Secondary

Daily Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METS)

We used a Garmin smartwatch to report the Daily Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METs). Median daily MET values over the last seven consecutive days for each participant, during each footwear condition (Orthofeet shoes and their own shoes), were calculated following the guidelines of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) and the American Heart Association (AHA) (Haskell et al., 2007). To calculate MET-minutes per week (MET·min·wk-¹), the median daily METs were multiplied by 60, as recommended by ACSM and AHA. The mean values for the calculated Median daily MET across all participants, during periods when they wore Orthofeet shoes and their own shoes, were computed and reported.

Time frame: 6 weeks

Population: Data from twenty-nine participants (out of 46 recruited) with valid physical activity monitoring during both sequences-A (Orthofeet shoes) and B (own shoes)-were included in this secondary analysis. Data from the remaining participants were excluded due to invalid physical activity records.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OrthoFeet ShoesDaily Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METS)461 MET-minutes per weekStandard Deviation 22
Own ShoesDaily Metabolic Equivalent of Task (METS)427 MET-minutes per weekStandard Deviation 17
Secondary

Disability at Baseline and Week 6

The disability level at baseline and week 6 was assessed using the disability subscale of the Foot Function Index (FFI). This subscale consists of nine items that evaluate the difficulty experienced in performing various functional activities due to foot problems. These activities include walking inside and outside the house, climbing and descending stairs, getting out of a chair, standing on tiptoe, climbing curbs, and running or fast walking. Each item is rated on a scale from 0 (no difficulty) to 10 (so difficult it requires help). The scores for the disability subscale range from 0 to 90, with higher scores indicating greater disability.

Time frame: baseline, week 6

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OrthoFeet ShoesDisability at Baseline and Week 6baseline38.5 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 22.4
OrthoFeet ShoesDisability at Baseline and Week 6week 624.9 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 8.5
Own ShoesDisability at Baseline and Week 6baseline35.5 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 25.5
Own ShoesDisability at Baseline and Week 6week 631.4 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 22.2
Secondary

Pain Score at Baseline and Week 6

Foot pain at baseline and 6 weeks for each intervention (Orthofeet and own shoes) will be assessed using the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire. The pain subscale asks participants to rate their foot pain on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain) based on their experiences during various activities over the past two weeks. Seven of the nine questions were summed for final analysis, excluding pain walking with orthotics and pain standing with orthotics, as the focus was to compare Orthofeet shoes to participants' own shoes, not prescribed orthoses. The resulting total score ranges from 0 to 70, with higher values indicating worse overall pain.

Time frame: baseline, week 6

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OrthoFeet ShoesPain Score at Baseline and Week 6baseline34.7 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 15.9
OrthoFeet ShoesPain Score at Baseline and Week 6week 622.8 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 16.4
Own ShoesPain Score at Baseline and Week 6baseline33 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 17.5
Own ShoesPain Score at Baseline and Week 6week 631.4 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 22.2
Secondary

Physical Activity Limitation

Physical activity limitations at baseline and were assessed using the Activity Limitation subscale of the Foot Function Index (FFI). This subscale comprises five items that evaluate the extent to which foot problems restrict a person's physical activities, including walking distances, standing on tiptoe, climbing stairs, and engaging in vigorous activities. Each item is rated on a scale from 0 (no limitation) to 10 (maximum limitation), with higher scores indicating greater activity limitation. The total score for this subscale ranges from 0 to 50. In this study, changes from baseline at week 6 for each intervention duration were assessed and reported. In this study the changes from baseline at week 6 for each intervention duration was assessed and reported

Time frame: baseline, week 6

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OrthoFeet ShoesPhysical Activity Limitationbaseline13.3 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 9.4
OrthoFeet ShoesPhysical Activity Limitationweek 69.9 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 8.5
Own ShoesPhysical Activity Limitationbaseline12.2 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 10
Own ShoesPhysical Activity Limitationweek 610.5 unit on scaleStandard Deviation 8.7
Secondary

Step Count

Step count will be measured over the course of 6 weeks for each intervention arm (Intervention A (Orthofeet) and Intervention B (own shoes)) using a smartwatch (Vivosmart 4, Garmin, USA). Steps per day were recorded in 15-min intervals and summed over each 24-h period. For analysis, the mean daily steps from the last seven consecutive days of each footwear condition (A and B) were calculated for each participant.

Time frame: from baseline to 6 weeks

Population: Data from twenty-nine participants (out of 46 recruited) with valid physical activity monitoring during both sequences-A (Orthofeet shoes) and B (own shoes)-were included in this secondary analysis. Data from the remaining participants were excluded due to invalid physical activity records.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
OrthoFeet ShoesStep Count5456 steps/dayStandard Deviation 476
Own ShoesStep Count4758 steps/dayStandard Deviation 474

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