AzTrials
AzTrials

Ankle FractureRe-BAFNCT07521696

Physical Recovery During Bracing After Ankle Fracture (Re-BAF)

A study testing Ankle stirrup and Foot-ankle brace in people with Ankle Fracture and Recovery, run by Odense University Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record

Search all trials

Trial summary

Ankle fractures are among the most common fractures and represent the second most frequent fracture type requiring surgery. Many patients experience long-term pain, stiffness, and reduced ankle function, which substantially limits their physical activity. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Ankle Fracture, Recovery, Physical Activity
What is being tested?
Ankle stirrup and Foot-ankle brace
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
280 participants
Where
1 siteDenmark
Study dates
1 Jun 2026to 30 Sep 2029
Phase
Interventional

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 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • 18 years or older
  • Surgically or non-surgically treated ankle fracture

Who cannot join

  • Pathological fractures
  • Open fractures (skin perforation)
  • Prolonged need for immobilisation (e.g. non-union or insufficient wound healing)
  • Non-weight bearing treatment
  • Inability to adhere to trial procedures (e.g. neuropathy or severe psychiatric disorder)
  • Allergy to SENS Motion adhesive patches
  • Inability to read or speak Danish
  • Uninterest in participating

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Katrine K Krag-Andersen, PT, MSc contact

+4522466435

kanderse@health.sdu.dk

Jonas A Ipsen, PT, PhD contact

+4523925264

Jonas.Ammundsen.Ipsen@rsyd.dk

Denmark1 site, 1 recruiting
  • Odense University Hospital

    Odense, Region Syddanmark, 5000

    Bjarke Viberg, MD, PhD, +4528669059, bjarke.viberg@rsyd.dk

    Louise D Petersen, Clinical Research Coordinator, +45 51435711, Louise.Dyhring.Petersen@rsyd.dk

    Recruiting

Other trials in Denmark

About this study

Official title: Physical Recovery During Bracing After Ankle Fracture (Re-BAF): A Multi-Center Superiority Analysis Nested Within a Non-inferiority Randomised Controlled Trial (BAF; NCT07163091)

Ankle fractures are among the most common fractures and represent the second most frequent fracture type requiring surgery. Many patients experience long-term pain, stiffness, and reduced ankle function, which substantially limits their physical activity. Even five years after injury, more than a third of patients have not regained their pre-injury activity levels.

Standard treatment typically involves immobilisation using a rigid foot-ankle brace (walker). Although effective in protecting fracture healing, these braces may be overly restrictive, contributing to ankle stiffness, swelling, delayed physical recovery and return to daily activities, and reduced quality of life. Patients increasingly express a preference for lighter, movement-permitting ankle supports, such as minimal ankle stirrups. Recent evidence suggests that braces and elastic bands that allow more ankle movement than walkers may enhance faster recovery without increasing complications.

Read more

However, high quality evidence is necessary for more robust conclusions. The Scandinavian Bracing after Ankle Fracture (BAF) multicentre randomised controlled trial (NCT07163091) therefore investigates whether an ankle stirrup is non-inferior to a standard walker with respect to patient-reported ankle pain and function, measured by the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) three months after ankle fracture. The primary hypothesis is that ankle stirrups better align with patients' preferences for less restrictive bracing while providing sufficient stability during fracture healing. Secondarily, ankle stirrups may promote faster recovery and physical activity.

The Re-BAF trial is nested within a larger multicentre non-inferiority trial (Bracing after Ankle Fracture [BAF], ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT07163091), aiming to investigate whether an ankle stirrup is non-inferior to a standard foot-ankle brace in improving patient-reported foot and ankle function, as measured by the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire ([MOXFQ], primary BAF outcome) after ankle fracture.

The aim of the Re-BAF trial is to investigate whether ankle stirrups are superior to standard foot-ankle braces in improving physical activity, assessed using objectively measured thigh-worn accelerometry from baseline (i.e. randomisation) to 12-week follow-up. We hypothesize that early and continuous movement during rehabilitation, enabled by an ankle stirrup, is superior in improving physical activity compared with a foot-ankle brace, without compromising fracture healing.

Read the detailed description

Background: Although patients generally acknowledge the need for immobilisation following ankle fracture, a qualitative study including ten patients found substantial challenges in adhering to immobilisation recommendations. In a randomised controlled trial (RCT) by Smeeing et al. (2020), braces and elastic bandages permitting greater ankle movement than standard walkers were not associated with poorer functional outcomes and were associated with a faster return to work (p = 0.02) without an increased risk of complications. However, the trial was terminated after inclusion of only half of the planned sample, raising concerns regarding statistical power and robustness of the findings. Compared to the walker, ankle stirrups may better align with patient preferences while promoting physical activity and faster recovery.

Aim: The aim of this Re-BAF trial is to investigate if ankle stirrups, allowing active weight-bearing, are superior to rigid foot-ankle braces on patients' daily physical activity levels and physical recovery.

Study design: Superiority trial including 280 adult patients (140 per arm) with surgically or non-surgically treated ankle fractures, nested within a larger Scandinavian randomized multicentre non-inferiority trial (n=1400). Participants will be randomized to four weeks of weight-bearing as tolerated in either an ankle stirrup or a foot-ankle brace.

Eligibility: Inclusion: patients aged ≥18 years with surgically or non-surgically treated ankle fractures. Exclusion: pathological fractures, open fractures, prolonged need for ankle immobilisation (e.g., non-union or poor wound healing), inability to adhere to trial procedures (e.g. neuropathy or severe psychiatric disorder), non-weight bearing treatment, allergy to adhesive tape used for the SENS apparatus, uninterest in participating in the trial, or inability to read Danish.

Recruitment: Patients will be recruited at their one- to two-week follow-up from orthopaedic departments across Denmark. Patient recruitment begins after one to two weeks, as surgically treated patients are typically immobilised in casts or foot-ankle braces and instructed to avoid or minimise weight-bearing during the initial postoperative period to allow swelling to subside and wounds to heal. Likewise, non-surgically treated patients are typically immobilised in a foot-ankle brace. However, weight-bearing recommendations vary between hospitals and surgeons, ranging from weight-bearing as tolerated to limited or non-weight-bearing until fracture stability is confirmed radiographically at the one- to two-week follow-up. The type of immobilisation (e.g., cast or brace) and weight-bearing restrictions during the initial weeks therefore vary across hospitals and treating surgeons.

Randomisation: Patients will be randomised to four weeks of weight-bearing as tolerated in either a foot-ankle brace (walker) or an ankle stirrup, using REDCap Randomize, allocated 1:1. Randomisation will be performed in blocks to ensure balanced allocation of surgically and non-surgically treated patients between groups, as well as equal distribution of intervention and control patients across recruitment centres. Weight-bearing will be unrestricted in both groups; thus, the only intervention difference will be the type of brace (ankle stirrup versus walker). Other variation will reflect usual clinical practice.

Methods: From baseline (randomisation), patients will wear a thigh-worn SENS Motion® accelerometer, a GDPR-compliant medical sensor that continuously records physical activity, movement intensity, and nocturnal activity. The device will be worn until the battery is depleted, which is expected to occur after approximately 20 weeks. Weekly surveys will capture pain, analgesic use, and fear of movement. Additionally, two questionnaires will be distributed electronically via e-Boks alongside the patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of the BAF trial to assess fear of movement and patient-reported physical activity.

Outcomes: The primary outcome is the between-group difference in total physical activity (accelerometer counts) from baseline (randomisation) to 12 weeks post-fracture, while secondary outcomes include between-group differences in daily step counts, nocturnal activity (sleep efficiency proxy), time to resume vigorous activities, pain, analgesic use, patient-reported physical activity, and fear of movement.

A detailed and pre-specified Statistical Analysis Plan (SAP) will be made publicly available prior to database lock and before any unblinding of the data.

Timepoints: Assessments will be performed at baseline (randomisation), 6 weeks, 12 weeks (primary endpoint). Accelerometer-based measurements and weekly surveys will continue until the battery of the SENS accelerometer is depleted (approximately 22 weeks post-fracture). Questionnaires will be collected at 6, 12, and 26 weeks post-fracture alongside the patient-reported outcome measures of the BAF trial.

Sample size calculation: As no anchor-based minimal clinically important difference (MCID) exists for physical activity in ankle fracture patients, an MCID of 17-35% in daily step counts, derived from research on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, will be used. Applying a 17% threshold to total accelerometer counts per day, on a comparable patient group, results in an expected between-group difference of 50,500 activity counts/day. To detect statistically significant differences at a two-tailed α level of 0.05 and β = 0.80, assuming a standard deviation of 101,000 counts per day before and after the intervention, a sample of 63 participants from each subgroup (surgical/non-surgical) per intervention group (ankle stirrup vs. foot-ankle brace) is required. To account for potential dropouts, seven additional patients will be included per subgroup, resulting in a total sample size of 280 patients.

Blinding/masking: Participants and care providers cannot be blinded due to the nature of the brace interventions. Data are labelled using allocation codes only. Outcome assessments and statistical analyses will be performed blinded to treatment allocation. The primary investigator is not involved in the randomisation process and will remain blinded to allocation during data collection, management and analysis.

Being tested
Ankle stirrup, Foot-ankle brace
Keywords
Ankle Fractures, Recovery, Rehabilitation, Braces, Physical activity, Randomized Controlled Trial
Medical subject headings
Ankle Fractures, Motor Activity

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • Ankle stirrupOther

    Four weeks of weight-bearing as tolerated using an ankle stirrup

  • Foot-ankle braceOther

    Four weeks of weight-bearing as tolerated using a foot-ankle brace (walker)

Study groups in NCT07521696
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Ankle stirrupExperimentalActive ankel dorsal and plantar flexion during use of the ankle stirrup
Receives: Other: Ankle stirrup
Foot-ankle brace (walker)Active comparatorImmobilisation during use of the foot-ankle brace
Receives: Other: Foot-ankle brace

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Daily SENS Motion® accelerometer counts as a measure of daily physical activity during the first 12 weeks following ankle fracture

    From baseline (randomisation) until 12 weeks post-fracture, participants will continuously wear a thigh-mounted SENS Motion® accelerometer, a GDPR-compliant medical-grade sensor, to objectively assess physical activity and sleep.

    The SENS Motion accelerometer is a validated device for use in both younger and older orthopaedic populations. It continuously measures total physical activity (expressed as accelerometer counts per day), time spent resting, standing, and being physically active (including walking, running, and cycling), number of steps, movement intensity, nocturnal activity, and sleep duration.

    The primary endpoint is the between-group difference in physical activity (accelerometer counts) from baseline (randomisation) to 6 and 12 weeks (primary) post-fracture.

    Measured: From baseline (randomisation) to 12 weeks post-fracture.

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous-intensity physical activity (MVPA) in the first 12 weeks following ankle fracture

    Between-group differences in weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), derived from accelerometer-based activity measurements.

    Measured: From baseline (randomisation) to 6 weeks and 12 weeks post-fracture

  2. Patient-reported physical activity during the first 12 weeks post-fracture

    Between-group differences in self-reported physical activity level will be assessed using the short-form International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-SF).

    The IPAQ-SF assesses self-reported physical activity over the previous seven days and summarises walking, moderate-intensity activity, vigorous-intensity activity, and sitting time into a single score expressed as metabolic equivalent minutes per week (MET-min/week). This summary score is subsequently used to classify patients into one of three physical activity levels: low, moderate, or high. Only this categorical classification will be used as the outcome measure.

    The questionnaire will be distributed electronically via e-Boks at baseline (randomisation) and at 6 and 12 weeks post-fracture, alongside the PROMs from the BAF trial, within which Re-BAF is nested.

    Measured: Between-group differences are evaluated from baseline (randomisation) to 6 weeks and 12 weeks post-fracture

  3. Patient-reported weekly pain during the first 12 weeks post-fracture

    Between-group differences in patient-reported pain intensity will be assessed using the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). The NRS is an 11-point scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst imaginable pain), on which patients report their average pain intensity over the past week. Assessments will be collected weekly via an app-based survey.

    Measured: Between-group differences over time from baseline (randomisation) to 12 weeks post-fracture will be analysed using mixed-effects models with repeated weekly measurements, with results reported at 6 and 12 weeks.

  4. Patient-reported weekly analgesic use during the first 12 weeks post-fracture

    Between-group differences in patient-reported analgesic use will be assessed using a single-item measure capturing the number of days (0-7) on which analgesics were taken during the previous 7 days. Assessments will be collected weekly via an app-based survey.

    Measured: Between-group differences over time from baseline (randomisation) to 12 weeks post-fracture will be analysed using mixed-effects models with repeated weekly measurements, with results reported at 6 and 12 weeks.

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted13 Apr 2026
  2. Study start1 Jun 2026
  3. Primary completion30 Sep 2028 (estimated)
  4. Study completion30 Sep 2029 (estimated)

Resources

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
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
Double blind
Who is masked
Investigator, Outcomes assessor
Enrolment
280 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT07521696
Sponsor's protocol ID
VMK: 2502110
Other IDs
10.46540/4308-00191B, 2025 - A6961
Acronym
Re-BAF
Status last verified
Oct 2026
First submitted
20 Mar 2026
Last updated
16 Oct 2026
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
Yes: Access to individual de-identified participant data will be provided to anyone who wishes to access the data.

Publications

  • Michael Möller CE, Cecilia Mellstrand Navarro, Cecilia Rogmark, Emilia Möller Rydberg, Fabian Burmeister, Hans Juto, Hans-Peter Bögl, Jonas Sundkvist, Mattias Lorentzon, Michael Möller,Mikael Sundfeldt, My von Friesendorff, Olof Wolf, Paul Gerdhem, Morberg, Torsten Backteman, Sebastian Mukka, Simon Blixt Hanne Carlsen. Svenska Frakturregistret Årsrapport 2022. Valentin Experience Regiontryckeriet VGR: Svenska Frakturregistret; 2022.

  • Tengberg P.T BM, Gromov K, Kallemose T, Troelsen A. Annual Report Danish Fracture Database 2017.

  • Zinder SM, Granata KP, Shultz SJ, Gansneder BM. Ankle bracing and the neuromuscular factors influencing joint stiffness. J Athl Train. 2009 Jul-Aug;44(4):363-9. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-44.4.363.

    PubMed 19593418
  • Luna IE, Kehlet H, Wede HR, Hoevsgaard SJ, Aasvang EK. Objectively measured early physical activity after total hip or knee arthroplasty. J Clin Monit Comput. 2019 Jun;33(3):509-522. doi: 10.1007/s10877-018-0185-5. Epub 2018 Jul 23.

    PubMed 30039461
  • Teylan M, Kantorowski A, Homsy D, Kadri R, Richardson C, Moy M. Physical activity in COPD: Minimal clinically important difference for medical events. Chron Respir Dis. 2019 Jan-Dec;16:1479973118816424. doi: 10.1177/1479973118816424.

    PubMed 30789017
  • Smeeing DPJ, Houwert RM, Briet JP, Groenwold RHH, Lansink KWW, Leenen LPH, van der Zwaal P, Hoogendoorn JM, van Heijl M, Verleisdonk EJ, Segers MJM, Hietbrink F. Weight-bearing or non-weight-bearing after surgical treatment of ankle fractures: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2020 Feb;46(1):121-130. doi: 10.1007/s00068-018-1016-6. Epub 2018 Sep 24.

    PubMed 30251154
  • Smeeing DP, Houwert RM, Briet JP, Kelder JC, Segers MJ, Verleisdonk EJ, Leenen LP, Hietbrink F. Weight-bearing and mobilization in the postoperative care of ankle fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies. PLoS One. 2015 Feb 19;10(2):e0118320. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0118320. eCollection 2015.

    PubMed 25695796
  • McKeown R, Kearney RS, Liew ZH, Ellard DR. Patient experiences of an ankle fracture and the most important factors in their recovery: a qualitative interview study. BMJ Open. 2020 Feb 4;10(2):e033539. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-033539.

    PubMed 32024789
  • Appell HJ. Muscular atrophy following immobilisation. A review. Sports Med. 1990 Jul;10(1):42-58. doi: 10.2165/00007256-199010010-00005.

    PubMed 2197699
  • Ribeiro de Avila V, Bento T, Gomes W, Leitao J, Fortuna de Sousa N. Functional Outcomes and Quality of Life After Ankle Fracture Surgically Treated: A Systematic Review. J Sport Rehabil. 2018 May 1;27(3):274-283. doi: 10.1123/jsr.2016-0199. Epub 2018 Jun 1.

    PubMed 28338395
  • Kelemework AD, Haile AW, Bayable SD. Assessing the functional outcomes of ankle fracture and its predictive factors following surgical treatment at Addis Ababa burn, emergency, and trauma (AaBET) hospital, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2021: A 5-year retrospective cross-sectional study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol. 2023 Apr;33(3):661-667. doi: 10.1007/s00590-022-03283-2. Epub 2022 Jun 6.

    PubMed 35666308
  • Shah NH, Sundaram RO, Velusamy A, Braithwaite IJ. Five-year functional outcome analysis of ankle fracture fixation. Injury. 2007 Nov;38(11):1308-12. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2007.06.002. Epub 2007 Sep 20.

    PubMed 17888434
  • Somersalo A, Paloneva J, Kautiainen H, Lonnroos E, Heinanen M, Kiviranta I. Incidence of fractures requiring inpatient care. Acta Orthop. 2014 Sep;85(5):525-30. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2014.908340. Epub 2014 Apr 3.

    PubMed 24694275

Free account

Keep searching with a free account

You’ve used your 3 free searches for this session. Log in or create a free AzTrials account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in