ArticleJournal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry2024
Use, tolerability, benefits and side effects of orthotic devices in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease.
Article in Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perception of ankle foot orthoses by individuals with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease.Prosthetics and orthotics international · 2026Article
- Multidimensional Assessment of Fall Risk Using the Timed Up and Go Test and Complementary Measures in a Charcot-Marie-Tooth Type 1A Neuropathy.Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation · 2026Article
- Patient journey with Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease - A German patient survey study.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2026Article
- Feasibility of combining a sensorimotor foot orthosis with a prefabricated carbon-fiber ankle-foot orthosis: A pilot study.Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal · 2026Article
- Multidimensional evaluation of clinical and functional impairment in a large population of patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- Is gaitrite system sensitive in discriminating gait pattern of subjects affected by Charcot Marie tooth? A pilot study.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025Article
- A cross-sectional survey on the health status of patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease in a Chinese national patient group.Journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Short-term effects of foot surgery on walking-related pain, function, and satisfaction in patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease: a prospective cohort study.Frontiers in neurology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
29 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundShoe inserts, orthopaedic shoes, ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) are important devices in Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT) management, but data about use, benefits and tolerance are scanty.
methodsWe administered to Italian CMT Registry patients an online ad hoc questionnaire investigating use, complications and perceived benefit/tolerability/emotional distress of shoe inserts, orthopaedic shoes, AFOs and other orthoses/aids. Patients were also asked to fill in the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology questionnaire, rating satisfaction with currently used AFO and related services.
resultsWe analysed answers from 266 CMT patients. Seventy per cent of subjects were prescribed lower limb orthoses, but 19% did not used them. Overall, 39% of subjects wore shoe inserts, 18% orthopaedic shoes and 23% AFOs. Frequency of abandonment was high: 24% for shoe inserts, 28% for orthopaedic shoes and 31% for AFOs. Complications were reported by 59% of patients and were more frequently related to AFOs (69%). AFO users experienced greater emotional distress and reduced tolerability as compared with shoe inserts (p<0.001) and orthopaedic shoes (p=0.003 and p=0.045, respectively). Disease severity, degree of foot weakness, customisation and timing for customisation were determinant factors in AFOs' tolerability. Quality of professional and follow-up services were perceived issues.
conclusionsThe majority of CMT patients is prescribed shoe inserts, orthopaedic shoes and/or AFOs. Although perceived benefits and tolerability are rather good, there is a high rate of complications, potentially inappropriate prescriptions and considerable emotional distress, which reduce the use of AFOs. A rational, patient-oriented and multidisciplinary approach to orthoses prescription must be encouraged.
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.