ArticleMedicine2019
Effect of ankle-foot orthosis on functional mobility and dynamic balance of patients after stroke: Study protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Article in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brazilian practice guidelines for stroke rehabilitation: Part II.Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria · 2022Guideline
- Effect of an Ankle Stabilization Strap Using a Badaging Technique on Ankle Range of Motion, Balance, and Spatiotemporal Gait Parameters in Patients with Chronic Stroke: A Randomized Controlled Trial.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effects of ankle-foot orthoses on gait parameters in post-stroke patients with different Brunnstrom stages of the lower limb: a single-center crossover trial.European journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Validity of an android device for assessing mobility in people with chronic stroke and hemiparesis: a cross-sectional study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Passive Articulated and Non-Articulated Ankle-Foot Orthoses for Gait Rehabilitation: A Narrative Review.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Efficacy on gait and posture control after botulinum toxin A injection for lower-limb spasticity treatment after stroke: A randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Article
- Lower Extremity Rehabilitation in Patients with Post-Stroke Sequelae through Virtual Reality Associated with Mirror Therapy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The Application of Technological Intervention for Stroke Rehabilitation in Southeast Asia: A Scoping Review With Stakeholders' Consultation.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Immersive Virtual Reality in Stroke Patients as a New Approach for Reducing Postural Disabilities and Falls Risk: A Case Series.Brain sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionStroke is the principal cause of impairment in the motor function and gait of adults. One of the resources used in rehabilitation to optimize gait is a prescription of ankle-foot orthosis (AFO), and the most prescribed AFOs are Fixed AFO and Articulated AFO; however, it is not known which of these options is more effective for these individuals. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of different types of ankle-foot orthosis functional mobility and dynamic balance in stroke patients.
methodsProspective randomized controlled clinical trial with 2 parallel groups will be conducted, and the aim is to recruit 50 patients with stroke diagnosis within 1 year, who indicated that they use both types of orthotics, who had a previous Rankin score less than or equal to 3, and who obtained AFO orthosis through the Hospital Clinics at the Botucatu Medical School (HCBMS) São Paulo, Brazil. After a specific evaluation by a physiotherapist, the patient will receive 1 of the AFO types via randomization. After 30 days, the patient will be reevaluated. The primary outcomes will be balance and mobility, which will be evaluated by the Time Up Go Test (TUG) and Tinetti's Scale of Mobility and Balance (TSMB). The secondary outcomes will be quality of life and the levels of anxiety and depression, which will be evaluated with the European (5D) Quality of Life Scale (Euroqol) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Group allocation will be not concealed because the blinding of participants and of therapists that provide intervention is not possible, and all analyses will be based on an intention-to-treat principle. This study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of the São Paulo State University UNESP, number 2.367.953. The results will be published in relevant journal. DISCUSSION: The results of this study will contribute to clinical practice by identifying the type of AFO orthosis that is more suitable for this condition, helping to standardize prescription of these orthoses by professionals, and guiding future research studies on this subject, which is still incompletely defined in the literature.
trial registrationRBR-6SF2VV (March 5, 2018).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.