Quality of Life assessment of children with clubfeet using a new type of brace.
Recruiting
- Conditions
- clubfoot, clubfeet, dynamic brace, Ponseti.klompvoeten, dynamische brace.
- Registration Number
- NL-OMON25230
- Lead Sponsor
- AGP van Ruiten/ dr. R.H.G.P. van Erve
- Brief Summary
/A
- Detailed Description
Not available
Recruitment & Eligibility
- Status
- Recruiting
- Sex
- Not specified
- Target Recruitment
- 30
Inclusion Criteria
All patients with clubfeet born in the referral area of the Deventer Ziekenhuis are selected for this study. There is a intention to treat. That means all patients will undergo at start the same treatment. That is, if conservative treatment is possible.
Exclusion Criteria
As mentioned above, all patients with clubfeet will be included.
Study & Design
- Study Type
- Interventional
- Study Design
- Not specified
- Primary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method The main study endpoint is at age 18 months. This will be the follow-up for this research.
- Secondary Outcome Measures
Name Time Method Secondary endpoint is failure of maintaining correction using the Dynko brace. Non-compliance will also be a secondary endpoint.
Related Research Topics
Explore scientific publications, clinical data analysis, treatment approaches, and expert-compiled information related to the mechanisms and outcomes of this trial. Click any topic for comprehensive research insights.
How does the Dynko brace compare to Ponseti method in clubfoot treatment outcomes and patient compliance?
What biomechanical parameters influence Dynko brace efficacy in pediatric clubfoot correction?
Are there predictive biomarkers for response to dynamic bracing in idiopathic vs. syndromic clubfoot?
What are the long-term adverse event profiles of fully dynamic braces versus static orthoses in clubfoot management?
How does Dynko brace design address soft tissue stiffness in clubfoot compared to traditional serial casting?