Top

Journal of Foot and Ankle Research

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Research

A randomised controlled trial and cost-consequence analysis of traditional and digital foot orthoses supply chains in a National Health Service setting: application to feet at risk of diabetic plantar ulceration

Authors: D. J. Parker, G. H. Nuttall, N. Bray, T. Hugill, A. Martinez-Santos, R. T. Edwards, C. Nester

Published in: Journal of Foot and Ankle Research | Issue 1/2019

Abstract

Background

Diabetic foot ulceration is a considerable cost to the NHS and foot orthotic provision is a core strategy for the management of the people with diabetes and a moderate to high risk of foot ulceration. The traditional process to produce a custom-made foot orthotic device is to use manual casting of foot shape and physical moulding of orthoses materials. Parts of this process can be undertaken using digital tools rather than manual processes with potential advantages. The aim of this trial was to provide the first comparison of a traditional orthoses supply chain to a digital supply chain over a 6 month period. The trial used plantar pressure, health status, and health service time and cost data to compare the two supply chains.

Methods

Fifty-seven participants with diabetes were randomly allocated to each supply chain. Plantar pressure data and health status (EQ5D, ICECAP) was assessed at point of supply and at six-months. The costs for orthoses and clinical services accessed by participants were assessed over the 6 months of the trial. Primary outcomes were: reduction in peak plantar pressure at the site of highest pressure, assessed for non-inferiority to current care. Secondary outcomes were: reduction in plantar pressure at foot regions identified as at risk (> 200 kPa), cost-consequence analysis (supply chain, clinician time, service use) and health status.

Results

At point of supply pressure reduction for the digital supply chain was non-inferior to a predefined margin and superior (p < 0.1) to the traditional supply chain, but both supply chains were inferior to the margin after 6 months. Custom-made orthoses significantly reduced pressure for at risk regions compared to a flat control (traditional − 13.85%, digital − 20.52%). The digital supply chain was more expensive (+£13.17) and required more clinician time (+ 35 min). There were no significant differences in health status or service use between supply chains.

Conclusions

Custom made foot orthoses reduce pressure as expected. Given some assumptions about the cost models we used, the supply chain process adopted to produce the orthoses seems to have marginal impact on overall costs and health status.

Trial registration

Retrospectively registered on ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN10978940, 04/11/2015).

Available only for authorised users

Guest JF, Fuller GW, Vowden P. Diabetic foot ulcer management in clinical practice in the UK: costs and outcomes. Int Wound J. 2018;15:43–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12816.CrossRefPubMed

Bus SA, Armstrong DG, van Deursen RW, Lewis JEA, Caravaggi CF, Cavanagh PR. IWGDF guidance on footwear and offloading interventions to prevent and heal foot ulcers in patients with diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2016;32:25–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.2697.CrossRefPubMed

Owings TM, Apelqvist J, Stenström A, Becker M, Bus SA, Kalpen A, et al. Plantar pressures in diabetic patients with foot ulcers which have remained healed. Diabet Med. 2009;26:1141–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02835.x.CrossRefPubMed

Nester C, Graham A, Martinez-Santos A, Williams A, McAdam J, Newton V. National profile of foot orthotic provision in the United Kingdom, part 1: practitioners and scope of practice. J Foot Ankle Res. 2017;10:35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13047-017-0215-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Bus SA, Valk GD, van Deursen RW, Armstrong DG, Caravaggi C, Hlaváček P, et al. The effectiveness of footwear and offloading interventions to prevent and heal foot ulcers and reduce plantar pressure in diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2008;24:S162–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.850.CrossRefPubMed

Telfer S, Gibson KS, Hennessy K, Steultjens MP, Woodburn J. Computer-aided Design of Customized Foot Orthoses: reproducibility and effect of method used to obtain foot shape. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:863–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2011.12.019.CrossRefPubMed

Owings TM, Woerner JL, Frampton JD, Cavanagh PR, Botek G. Custom therapeutic insoles based on both foot shape and plantar pressure measurement provide enhanced pressure relief. Diabetes Care. 2008;31:839–44. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc07-2288.CrossRefPubMed

Telfer S, Woodburn J, Collier A, Cavanagh PR. Virtually optimized insoles for offloading the diabetic foot: a randomized crossover study. J Biomech. 2017;60:157–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2017.06.028.CrossRefPubMed

Burns J, Wegener C, Begg L, Vicaretti M, Fletcher J. Randomized trial of custom orthoses and footwear on foot pain and plantar pressure in diabetic peripheral arterial disease. Diabet Med. 2009;26:893–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02799.x.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Paton JS, Stenhouse EA, Bruce G, Zahra D, Jones RB. A comparison of customised and prefabricated insoles to reduce risk factors for neuropathic diabetic foot ulceration: a participant-blinded randomised controlled trial. J Foot Ankle Res. 2012;5:31. https://doi.org/10.1186/1757-1146-5-31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Ashry HR, Lavery LA, Murdoch DP, Frolich M, Lavery DC. Effectiveness of diabetic insoles to reduce foot pressures. J Foot Ankle Surg. 1997;36:268–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1067-2516(97)80071-3.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Ki SW, Leung AKL, Li ANM. Comparison of plantar pressure distribution patterns between foot orthoses provided by the CAD-CAM and foam impression methods. Prosthetics Orthot Int. 2008;32:356–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/03093640802016159.CrossRef

13.

San Tsung BY, Zhang M, Mak AFT, Wong MWN. Effectiveness of insoles on plantar pressure redistribution. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2004;41:767–74.CrossRef

14.

Hellstrand Tang U, Zügner R, Lisovskaja V, Karlsson J, Hagberg K, Tranberg R. Comparison of plantar pressure in three types of insole given to patients with diabetes at risk of developing foot ulcers – a two-year, randomized trial. J Clin Transl Endocrinol. 2014;1:121–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCTE.2014.06.002.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

FDA, CDER, CBER. Non-inferiority clinical trials to establish effectiveness guidance for industry 2016. https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/UCM202140.pdf. Accessed 3 July 2018.

16.

Bus SA, Ulbrecht JS, Cavanagh PR. Pressure relief and load redistribution by custom-made insoles in diabetic patients with neuropathy and foot deformity. Clin Biomech. 2004;19:629–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.02.010.CrossRef

17.

Martinez-Santos A. An investigation into the effect of customised insoles on plantar pressures in people with diabetes. Salford, UK: The University of Salford; 2016.

18.

Sealed Envelope | Power calculator for continuous outcome non-inferiority trial 2012. https://www.sealedenvelope.com/power/continuous-noninferior/. Accessed 22 Nov 2018.

19.

Gerard E. Dallal. Randomization.com 2008. http://www.randomization.com.

20.

Leese GP, Stang D, Pearson DW. A national approach to diabetes foot risk stratification and foot care. Scott Med J. 2011;56:151–5. https://doi.org/10.1258/smj.2011.011113.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Rosenbaum D, Hautmann S, Gold M, Claes L. Effects of walking speed on plantar pressure patterns and hindfoot angular motion. Gait Posture. 1994;2:191–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/0966-6362(94)90007-8.CrossRef

22.

EuroQol Group. EuroQol--a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208.CrossRef

23.

Al-Janabi H, N Flynn T, Coast J. Development of a self-report measure of capability wellbeing for adults: the ICECAP-A. Qual Life Res. 2012;21:167–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-011-9927-2.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Curtis L, Burns A. Unit costs of health and social care 2015. 2015. https://www.pssru.ac.uk/project-pages/unit-costs/unit-costs-2015/?file=full. Accessed 6 May 2018.

25.

Department of Health. National Health Schedule of Reference Costs 2014 to 2015. 2015. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/477919/2014-15_Reference_costs_publication.pdf. Accessed 6 May 2018.

26.

van Hout B, Janssen MF, Feng Y-S, Kohlmann T, Busschbach J, Golicki D, et al. Interim scoring for the EQ-5D-5L: mapping the EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L value sets. Value Health. 2012;15:708–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2012.02.008.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Paton JS, Stenhouse E, Bruce G, Jones R. A longitudinal investigation into the functional and physical durability of insoles used for the preventive management of neuropathic diabetic feet. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2014;104:50–7. https://doi.org/10.7547/0003-0538-104.1.50.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Mauri L, D’Agostino RB. Challenges in the design and interpretation of noninferiority trials. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1357–67. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1510063.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Briggs AH, Wonderling DE, Mooney CZ. Pulling cost-effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: a non-parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health Econ. 1997;6:327–40. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199707)6:4<327::AID-HEC282>3.0.CO;2-W.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Perspective - York Health Economics Consortium 2016. https://www.yhec.co.uk/glossary/perspective/. Accessed 22 Nov 2018.

31.

Bray N, Noyes J, Harris N, Edwards RT. Measuring the health-related quality of life of children with impaired mobility: examining correlation and agreement between children and parent proxies. BMC Res Notes. 2017;10:377. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-2683-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Frost S, Gundle R, McLardy-Smith P, Murray D. Evidence for the validity of a patient-based instrument for assessment of outcome after revision hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:1125–9.CrossRef

33.

Jansson K-Å, Granath F. Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) before and after orthopedic surgery. Acta Orthop. 2011;82:82–9. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2010.548026.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Price C, Parker D, Nester C. Validity and repeatability of three in-shoe pressure measurement systems. Gait Posture. 2016;46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.01.026.

35.

Cavanagh PR, Ulbrecht JS, Caputo GM. New developments in the biomechanics of the diabetic foot. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. n.d.;16:S6–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/1520-7560(200009/10)16:1+<::AID-DMRR130>3.0.CO;2-Z.

Title: A randomised controlled trial and cost-consequence analysis of traditional and digital foot orthoses supply chains in a National Health Service setting: application to feet at risk of diabetic plantar ulceration
Authors: D. J. Parker
G. H. Nuttall
N. Bray
T. Hugill
A. Martinez-Santos
R. T. Edwards
C. Nester
Publication date: 01-12-2019
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Journal of Foot and Ankle Research / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 1757-1146
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13047-018-0311-0

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

A randomised controlled trial and cost-consequence analysis of traditional and digital foot orthoses supply chains in a National Health Service setting: application to feet at risk of diabetic plantar ulceration

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

An analysis of the foot in turnout using a dance specific 3D multi-segment foot model

Challenges of foot self-care in older people: a qualitative focus-group study

Foot orthoses for people with rheumatoid arthritis: a survey of prescription habits among podiatrists

Work participation, mobility and foot symptoms in people with systemic lupus erythematosus: findings of a UK national survey

“I need somebody who knows about feet” a qualitative study investigating the lived experiences of conservative treatment for patients with posterior tibial tendon dysfunction

Management of musculoskeletal foot and ankle conditions prior to public-sector orthopaedic referral in South Australia