Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30904880›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2019

INSoles To Ease Pressure (INSTEP) Study: a multicentre, randomised controlled feasibility study to compare the effectiveness of a novel instant optimised insole with a standard insole for people with diabetic neuropathy: a study protocol.

Richard Collings, Jennifer A Freeman, Jos Latour, Patricia Jane Vickery, Sam Glasser, Vasileios Lepesis, Doyo Enki, Joanne Paton

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Richard CollingsSchool of Health Professions Faculty of Health and Human Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7048-1386
Jennifer A FreemanSchool of Health Professions Faculty of Health and Human Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Jos LatourSchool of Nursing and Midwifery Faculty of Health and Human Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Patricia Jane VickeryPeninsula Clinical Trials Unit, Plymouth University, Plymouth, UK.
Sam GlasserPodiatry, Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, Torquay, UK.
Vasileios LepesisSchool of Health Professions Faculty of Health and Human Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Doyo EnkiMedical Statistics, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Joanne PatonSchool of Health Professions Faculty of Health and Human Sciences, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
University of Plymouth · GBTorbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

Department of Health CAT/CL10/007Department of Health ICA-CDRF-2015-01-054
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFoot ulceration is a multifactorial complication of diabetes. Therapeutic insoles and footwear are frequently used to reduce elevated tissue pressures associated with risk of foot ulceration. A novel protocol using in-shoe pressure measurement technology to provide an instant optimised insole and house shoe solution has been developed, with the aim of reducing foot ulceration.

aimThis study aims to assess the feasibility of conducting a multicentre randomised controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of a novel instant optimised insole with a standard insole for people with diabetic neuropathy. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a participant and assessor blinded, randomised, multicentre parallel group feasibility trial with embedded qualitative study. Seventy-six participants will be recruited from three podiatry clinics and randomised to an optimised insole plus usual care (intervention group) or standard insole plus usual care (control group) using a minimisation by randomisation procedure by study centre and previous ulcer status. Assessment visits and data collection will be at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 12 months. Feasibility and acceptability of the trial procedures will be determined in terms of recruitment and retention rates, data completion rates, intervention adherence and effectiveness of the blinding.Assessment of the appropriateness and performance of outcome measures will inform selection of the primary and secondary outcomes and sample size estimate for the anticipated definitive randomised controlled trial. Clinical outcomes include incidence of plantar foot ulceration and change in peak plantar pressure. Twelve participants (four from each centre) and three treating podiatrists (one from each centre) will be interviewed to explore their experiences of receiving and delivering the intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the South-West Exeter Research Ethics Committee. Findings will be disseminated through conference presentations, public platforms and academic publications. TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16011830; Pre-results.

Indexed as

Foot OrthosesPressureShoesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDiabetes MellitusDiabetic FootDiabetic NeuropathiesFeasibility StudiesFemaleFootHumansMaleMiddle AgedRandomized Controlled Trials as Topicdiabetic footprimary carequalitative research

Identifiers

PMID30904880
PMCPMC6477388
OpenAlexW2925337172

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.