Methodological considerations for a randomised controlled trial of podiatry care in rheumatoid arthritis: lessons from an exploratory trial
- PMID: 17986338
- PMCID: PMC2225393
- DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-8-109
Methodological considerations for a randomised controlled trial of podiatry care in rheumatoid arthritis: lessons from an exploratory trial
Abstract
Background: Whilst evidence exists to support the use of single treatments such as orthoses and footwear, the effectiveness of podiatry-led care as a complex intervention for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) related foot problems is unknown. The aim of this study was to undertake an exploratory randomised controlled parallel arm clinical trial (RheumAFooT) to inform the design and implementation of a definitive trial and to understand the potential benefits of this care.
Methods: Patients with a definite diagnosis of RA, stable drug management 3 months prior to entry, and a current history of foot problems (pain, deformity, stiffness, skin or nail lesions, or footwear problems) were recruited from a hospital outpatient rheumatology clinic and randomised to receive 12 months of podiatry treatment or no care. The primary outcome was change in foot health status using the impairment/footwear (LFISIF) and activity limitation/participation restriction (LFISAP) subscales of the Leeds Foot Impact Scale. Disease Activity Score (DAS), Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) score and walking speed (m/s) were also recorded.
Results: Of the 80 patients identified, 64 patients were eligible to participate in the pilot and 34 were recruited. 16 patients were randomised to receive podiatry led foot care and 18 received no care. Against a backdrop of stable disease (DAS and HAQ scores), there was a statistically significant between group difference in the change in foot health status for foot impairment (LFISIF) but not activity/participation (LFISAP) or function (walking speed) over 12 months. In the podiatry arm, 1 patient declined treatment following randomisation (did not want additional hospital visits) and 3 self-withdrew (lost to follow-up). Patients received an average of 3 consultations for assessment and treatment comprising routine care for skin and nail lesions (n = 3), foot orthoses (n = 9), footwear referral to the orthotist (n = 5), and ultrasound guided intra-articular steroid injection (n = 1).
Conclusion: In this exploratory trial patients were difficult to recruit (stable drug management and co-morbid disease) and retain (lack of benefit/additional treatment burden) but overall the intervention was safe (no adverse reactions). Twelve months of podiatry care maintained but did not improve foot health status. These observations are important for the design and implementation of a definitive randomised controlled trial.
Trial registration: ISRCTN: 01982076.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Patient and clinician views on the quality of foot health care for rheumatoid arthritis outpatients: a mixed methods service evaluation.J Foot Ankle Res. 2016 Jan 6;9:1. doi: 10.1186/s13047-015-0133-2. eCollection 2016. J Foot Ankle Res. 2016. PMID: 26740821 Free PMC article.
-
Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a multifaceted podiatry intervention for falls prevention in older people: a multicentre cohort randomised controlled trial (the REducing Falls with ORthoses and a Multifaceted podiatry intervention trial).Health Technol Assess. 2017 Apr;21(24):1-198. doi: 10.3310/hta21240. Health Technol Assess. 2017. PMID: 28621259 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Effectiveness of off-the-shelf footwear in reducing foot pain in Australian Department of Veterans' Affairs recipients not eligible for medical grade footwear: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Trials. 2013 Apr 23;14:106. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-106. Trials. 2013. PMID: 23782557 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
An evaluation of podiatry service use for people with inflammatory rheumatic diseases: a review of a rheumatology podiatry clinic in Aotearoa New Zealand.J Foot Ankle Res. 2022 May 16;15(1):36. doi: 10.1186/s13047-022-00542-7. J Foot Ankle Res. 2022. PMID: 35578311 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Clinical practice guidelines for the foot and ankle in rheumatoid arthritis: a critical appraisal.J Foot Ankle Res. 2016 Aug 19;9:31. doi: 10.1186/s13047-016-0167-0. eCollection 2016. J Foot Ankle Res. 2016. PMID: 27547242 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
"They just scraped off the calluses": a mixed methods exploration of foot care access and provision for people with rheumatoid arthritis in south-western Sydney, Australia.J Foot Ankle Res. 2013 Aug 13;6(1):34. doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-6-34. J Foot Ankle Res. 2013. PMID: 23938103 Free PMC article.
-
Forefoot pathology in rheumatoid arthritis identified with ultrasound may not localise to areas of highest pressure: cohort observations at baseline and twelve months.J Foot Ankle Res. 2011 Nov 23;4(1):25. doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-4-25. J Foot Ankle Res. 2011. PMID: 22112624 Free PMC article.
-
Effectiveness of foot orthoses in patients with rheumatoid arthritis related to disability and pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Qual Life Res. 2018 Dec;27(12):3059-3069. doi: 10.1007/s11136-018-1913-5. Epub 2018 Jun 19. Qual Life Res. 2018. PMID: 29922913
-
A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, controlled phase III clinical trial of chicken type II collagen in rheumatoid arthritis.Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11(6):R180. doi: 10.1186/ar2870. Epub 2009 Dec 1. Arthritis Res Ther. 2009. PMID: 19951408 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Challenges to evaluating complex interventions: a content analysis of published papers.BMC Public Health. 2013 Jun 11;13:568. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-568. BMC Public Health. 2013. PMID: 23758638 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Williams AE, Bowden AP. Meeting the challenge for foot health in rheumatic diseases. The Foot. 2004;14:154–8. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2004.03.006. - DOI
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical