AmputationEASENCT02958553
EmPOWERing Active Seniors With Energy
A study testing emPOWER Ankle and Subject's own passive prosthesis in people with Amputation, run by Otto Bock Healthcare Products GmbH at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
A pilot study comparing the emPOWER Ankle System to standard carbon fiber prosthetic feet, in active seniors. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 55 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Amputation
- What is being tested?
- emPOWER Ankle and Subject's own passive prosthesis
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 8 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 10 Feb 2017to 31 Jul 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 55 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Males and females
- 55 years or older
- Subjects with transtibial amputations of either leg at least 1 year prior
- Suction or elevated vacuum suspension and Socket Comfort Score of at least 6
- Sock fluctuation of ≤ 8 ply per day
- K-level rating of 3 or 4 based on the Amputee Mobility Predictor Assessment Tool
Show all 14Show fewer
- Ability to walk at a walking speed of > 0.75 meters per second
- Unilateral amputees (up to 7 bilateral amputees can be included, 1 per site in addition to the unilateral amputees who will be analyzed as a separate sub group)
- Foot size: 25-30 cm
- Ability to complete a continuous 6-Minute Walk Test
- Ability to provide written, informed consent
- Ability to complete study visits and study documents
- Ability to manage the complexity of a powered device including charging and changing batteries as needed
- Ability to read and understand English
Who cannot join
- Subjects who have never used a prosthetic device
- Less than 55 years of age
- Weight <150 lbs. or > 287 lbs.
- Transfemoral amputees
- Active sores or ulceration on subject's residual limb
- Sore on contralateral foot.
Show all 16Show fewer
- Cuff-link socket suspension
- Socket Comfort Score less than 6
- Sock fluctuation of > 8 per day
- K level of 1 or 2
- Amputation clearance < 8.625"
- History of stroke or TIA that impairs current walking
- Recent history of excessive falling defined as more than 2 falls requiring medical assistance in the prior year
- Medications potentially affecting balance
- Recent hospitalization (within past 3 months)
- Cognitive deficiency that would impact ability to charge and change batteries as needed
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
UTHealth, Department of Orthopedic Surgery
Houston, Texas, 77030
About this study
A pilot study comparing the emPOWER Ankle System to standard carbon fiber prosthetic feet, in active seniors.
Read the detailed description
The primary objective of this study is to characterize the increase in the distance subjects can walk during a six (6) minute period while wearing the emPOWER Ankle compared to a passive lower-extremity prosthesis.
- Conditions
- Amputation
- Being tested
- emPOWER Ankle, Subject's own passive prosthesis
- Keywords
- Lower Extremity Limb Loss, Prosthesis Use
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
emPOWER AnkleDevice
The device is 510k cleared and is intended to replace a missing foot and ankle. The emPOWER Ankle is to be used exclusively for fittings of lower-extremity amputations as prescribed by a healthcare professional.
Subject's own passive prosthesisDevice
Devices will vary. Data gathered will form a baseline.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| emPOWER Ankle (powered prosthesis) | Other | The subject's own passive prosthesis will be used as a baseline and crossed over after the emPOWER has been worn 3-4 months. Then the passive foot will be crossed back to the emPOWER for a final series of tests. Receives: Device: emPOWER Ankle; Device: Subject's own passive prosthesis |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT)
The proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful change (improvement, no change, worsening) in the walking distance measured by the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT). 6minWT improvement was defined as a minimum increase of 45 meters.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Secondary outcomes (15)
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Twelve Minute Walk Test (12MWT)
The proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful change (improvement, no change, worsening) in the walking distance measured by the Twelve Minute Walk Test (12MWT). 12minWT improvement was defined as a minimum increase of 90 meters.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the 10 Meter Walk Test (10MWT)
The proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful change (improvement, no change, worsening) in the walking distance measured by the 10 Meter Walk Test (10MWT). 10MWT improvement was defined as a minimum increase of 0.1 m/s.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the L-Test
The proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful change (improvement, no change, worsening) in the walking time measured in the L-Test. L-Test improvement was defined as a minimum decrease of 4.5 seconds.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Ramp Test
The proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful change (improvement, no change, worsening) in the walking time measured in theRamp Test. Ramp Test improvement was defined as a minimum decrease of 6 seconds to complete the test.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale Score
The proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful change (improvement, no change, worsening) in abulatory activities measured by the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale. Improvement in the ABC was defined as a minimum detectable change of 13% increase in score.
The ABC Scale is a self-administered questionnaire that asks the patient to rate his or her confidence in performing various ambulatory activities on a scale from 0% (no confidence) to 100% (complete confidence) without losing balance or becoming unsteady. Scores for each of the 16 items will be collected and an average percentage calculated, with scores <67 indicating an increased risk of falling.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Falls Efficacy Scale Score
The Falls Efficacy Scale is a validated 10-item self-report questionnaire designed to assess confidence in the ability to perform 10 activities of daily living without falling as an indicator of how one's fear of falling impacts physical performance. Each item is rated from 1 ("very confident") to 10 ("not confident at all"), and the per item ratings are added to generate a summary total score (10 to 100). Lower scores indicate more confidence and higher scores indicate lack of confidence and greater fear of falling. It has been validated for use in the elderly and persons with amputations. Scores ≥70 indicate an increased fear of falling. Improvement in the Falls Efficiacy Scale was defined as a minimum increase of 2 in the score.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Amputee Mobility Predictor (AMP) Assessment
The AMP is an instrument designed to measure ambulatory potential of lower-limb amputees. Subjects begin the test seated in a hard chair with arms and are tested for a total of 21 items assessing abilities of increasing level of difficulty. Abilities assessed include sitting balance, transfer from chair to chair, standing balance, gait quality, negotiating obstacles, and the use of assistive devices. The total score range for the AMP is 0 to 47 points. A minimal detectable change of 4 points was the definition of improvement.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility PLUS-M (12 Item Short Form)
The PLUS-M is a valid and reliable self-reported measure for the mobility of adults with lower limb amputations. PLUS-M asks about the patient's ability to perform simple and complex tasks. High PLUS-M scores correspond with greater mobility. Improvement in the Mobility PLUS-M (12 item Short Form) was defined by a minimum detectable change of an increase of 5 points in the total score.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS)
The PSFS is a self-report, goal-attainment measure aimed at identifying functional status limitations that are most relevant to individual patients. The PSFS is a reliable, valid, and efficient measure for detecting clinical change in persons with low back pain and knee dysfunction. Subjects were asked to identify three to five activities that they are having difficulty or are unable to perform because of their injury/condition. For the specified activities, patients were asked to rate their ability to perform each activity at that time (0-10 numerical scale) with '0' being unable to perform the activity, and '10' being able to perform the activity at the same level as they could prior to the injury/condition. The total score was calculated as the sum of the activity scores divided by the number of activities. Changes of >2 in the total score compared to baseline were considered "Improved."
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
The NPRS is a valid and reliable measure of pain that may be used across all musculoskeletal injuries/conditions and complements the PSFS. The patient was asked to rate the pain of their joints, foot, lower back, and if they are using an assistive device any additional affected limbs on average over the last 24 hours on a scale 1-10, with '1' being 'very mild' and '10' being the 'unimaginable unspeakable'. The scores on the NPRS instruments with the emPOWER Ankle were compared to the scores on the subject's passive prosthesis. An improvement was considered a positive change of 1 for at least one area without a corresponding decrease in another.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in Activity (Monitoring Using a Fitbit Over 2-week Periods)
A Fitbit activity monitor was worn to record the number of steps the Subject took with the prosthesis. The patient returned to the site with the activity monitor and the steps counted were downloaded from the device. In addition, the Subjects were sent home with a prepaid envelope and instructed to mail back the activity monitor if the next visit was more than 3 weeks later, to ensure that the data was not lost. The step counts were downloaded from the device the day the activity monitor was returned to the Investigator. The Investigator recorded the date the patient was affixed with the activity monitor, the date they received the returned activity monitor, and the date they synced the monitor. An improvement was defined as an increase in the average daily step count of 750 steps.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in PROMIS Physical Function
PROMIS item banks and their short forms are a reliable and precise measurements of patient reported outcome measures. The scores on the PROMIS instruments with the emPOWER Ankle 3 months after fitting will be compared to the scores on the subject's passive prosthesis. PROMIS Physical Function improvement was defined as a minimally clinically important difference (MCID) of an increase of 6.8 in a total score.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in PROMIS Global Health Short Form
PROMIS item banks and their short forms are a reliable and precise measurements of patient reported outcome measures. The scores on the PROMIS instruments with the emPOWER Ankle 3 months after fitting will be compared to the scores on the subject's passive prosthesis. PROMIS Global Health Short Form improvement was defined as an increase in a total score of 3.5.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in PROMIS Fatigue Short Form (7a)
PROMIS item banks and their short forms are a reliable and precise measurements of patient reported outcome measures. The scores on the PROMIS instruments with the emPOWER Ankle 3 months after fitting will be compared to the scores on the subject's passive prosthesis. PROMIS Fatigue Short Form (7a) improvement was defined as a minimally clinically important difference (MCID) of an increase of 5 in a total score.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in PROMIS Pain Intensity Short Form (3a)
PROMIS item banks and their short forms are a reliable and precise measurements of patient reported outcome measures. The scores on the PROMIS instruments with the emPOWER Ankle 3 months after fitting will be compared to the scores on the subject's passive prosthesis. PROMIS Pain Intensity Short Form (3a) improvement was defined as a minimally clinically important difference (MCID) of an increase of 6.9 in a total score.
Measured: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Nov 2016 (estimated)
- Study start10 Feb 2017
- Primary completion31 Jul 2018
- Study completion31 Jul 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for AmputationStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Model description
- First the patient data is gathered with the subject's own passive prosthetic. Then switched over to the emPOWER Ankle. Third, the patient's prosthetic is switched back to test for carry-over benefits. Then they are put on the emPOWER for a final series of tests.
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 8 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Otto Bock Healthcare Products GmbH
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- BionX Medical Technologies, Inc.
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Danielle Melton, M.D., Principal investigator, Principal Investigator
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02958553
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- P16-01
- Acronym
- EASE
- Status last verified
- Apr 2020
- First submitted
- 2 Nov 2016
- Last updated
- 24 Apr 2020
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 24 Apr 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- EmPOWERing Active Seniors With Energy
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02958553
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EASE / P16-01
- Conditions
- Amputation
- Keywords
- Lower Extremity Limb Loss, Prosthesis Use
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 8 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Otto Bock Healthcare Products GmbHIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- BionX Medical Technologies, Inc.
- Study start
- 10 Feb 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Jul 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Jul 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 Nov 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 9 Apr 2020
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
A pilot study comparing the emPOWER Ankle System to standard carbon fiber prosthetic feet, in active seniors.
Detailed description
The primary objective of this study is to characterize the increase in the distance subjects can walk during a six (6) minute period while wearing the emPOWER Ankle compared to a passive lower-extremity prosthesis.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
- Model description
- First the patient data is gathered with the subject's own passive prosthetic. Then switched over to the emPOWER Ankle. Third, the patient's prosthetic is switched back to test for carry-over benefits. Then they are put on the emPOWER for a final series of tests.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| emPOWER Ankle (powered prosthesis) | Other | Device: emPOWER Ankle, Device: Subject's own passive prosthesisThe subject's own passive prosthesis will be used as a baseline and crossed over after the emPOWER has been worn 3-4 months. Then the passive foot will be crossed back to the emPOWER for a final series of tests. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 55 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (14 listed)
- Males and females
- 55 years or older
- Subjects with transtibial amputations of either leg at least 1 year prior
- Suction or elevated vacuum suspension and Socket Comfort Score of at least 6
- Sock fluctuation of ≤ 8 ply per day
Key exclusion criteria (16 listed)
- Subjects who have never used a prosthetic device
- Less than 55 years of age
- Weight <150 lbs. or > 287 lbs.
- Transfemoral amputees
- Active sores or ulceration on subject's residual limb
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| emPOWER AnkleThe device is 510k cleared and is intended to replace a missing foot and ankle. The emPOWER Ankle is to be used exclusively for fittings of lower-extremity amputations as prescribed by a healthcare professional. | Device | emPOWER Ankle (powered prosthesis) |
| Subject's own passive prosthesisDevices will vary. Data gathered will form a baseline. | Device | emPOWER Ankle (powered prosthesis) |
Primary outcome
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
The proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful change (improvement, no change, worsening) in the walking distance measured by the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT). 6minWT improvement was defined as a minimum increase of 45 meters.
15 secondary outcomes
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Twelve Minute Walk Test (12MWT)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the 10 Meter Walk Test (10MWT)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the L-Test
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Ramp Test
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale Score
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Falls Efficacy Scale Score
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Amputee Mobility Predictor (AMP) Assessment
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Prosthetic Limb Users Survey of Mobility PLUS-M (12 Item Short Form)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in Activity (Monitoring Using a Fitbit Over 2-week Periods)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in PROMIS Physical Function
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in PROMIS Global Health Short Form
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in PROMIS Fatigue Short Form (7a)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in PROMIS Pain Intensity Short Form (3a)
Time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 24 Apr 2020.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Amputation
RecruitingObservational study
Cryo NerVe Block Extremity AmputatioN RegIStry for Post Operative and pHantom Limb Pain
Amputation, Amputation of Lower Limb
RecruitingObservational study
CNS Changes Following Upper Limb Loss
Amputation, Congenital, Upper Limb; Amelia
Recruiting
Hand Prosthesis Usability and Performance
Amputation
Recruiting
E-Socket, Diagnostic Monitoring
Trans-Tibial Amputation
RecruitingObservational study
Early Postoperative Pain Following a Limb Amputation
Amputation, Surgical, Pain Management
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Danielle Melton, M.D. principal investigator
Principal Investigator
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing emPOWER Ankle and Subject's own passive prosthesis in people with Amputation, run by Otto Bock Healthcare Products GmbH at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 14 inclusion and 16 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 24 Apr 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 9 Apr 2020). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Number of Participants With Improvement, No Change, or Worsening in Performance in the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT) (time frame: 3 months with the emPOWER ankle). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 24 Apr 2020.