Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Sponsor decision : Difficulties of inclusion and revision of the clinical evaluation report of the medical device under evaluation.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| EFOR, France | INDUSTRY |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Decathlon has developed Ankle STRONG products which are medical devices that must be positioned around the ankle to limit ankle sprain occurrence.
The Ankle STRONG devices cover a range of 3 products (Ankle STRONG 100/500/900). The differences between the devices is based on the strength of compression and the ankle maintain.
The objective of this multicentre study is to collect data on the related clinical complications and clinical outcomes of market-approved Decathlon Ankle STRONG products to demonstrate safety and performance of these devices in a real-world setting.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Orthosis Group 1 | Use of AnkleSTRONG100 device |
| |
| Control Group 1 | Control Group of the AnkleSTRONG100 Orthosis Group - No use of the device | ||
| Orthosis Group 2 | Use of AnkleSTRONG500 device |
| |
| Control Group 2 | Control Group of the AnkleSTRONG500 Orthosis Group - No use of the device | ||
| Orthosis Group 3 | Use of AnkleSTRONG900 device |
| |
| Control Group 3 | Control Group of the AnkleSTRONG900 Orthosis Group - No use of the device |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AnkleSTRONG100/500/900 | Device | At least 30 patients (15 patients in the orthosis group and 15 patients in the control group) per device type (3 device types: Ankle STRONG 100/500/900) totalling 90 patients will be included. Patients included in the orthosis group will use the device during sports sessions while patients included in the control group will not use an ankle support device. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Functional score | Comparison of the functional result (Karlsson Ankle Function Score, 0-100 points) between the baseline and last follow-up visit in each group (orthosis vs control), for each device model | 12 weeks of follow-up |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Confidence level | Gap in the confidence level (patient rated outcome with 6 questions, ranging from 0 to 100) related to physical activity, between the baseline and last follow-up visit in each group (orthosis vs control), for each device model | At baseline and 12 weeks of follow-up |
| Ankle instability |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Non-inclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Subject with ankle sprain whose current condition of his/her ankle allows the subject to resume usual physical activity
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Valérie WIECZOREK | Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille | Lille | 59000 | France |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
Comparison of ankle instability, assessed through a numerical rating scale (NRS, ranging from 0 to 10), between the groups (orthosis vs control), for each device model |
| At 4 weeks, 8 weeks and 12 weeks of follow-up |
| Ankle pain | Comparison of ankle pain, assessed through NRS (ranging from 0 to 10), between the groups (orthosis vs control), for each device model | At 4 weeks, 8 weeks and 12 weeks of follow-up |
| Safety (adverse events) | Comparison of adverse events rates between the groups (orthosis vs control), for each device model | 12 weeks of follow-up |