METHODS: This study, involving a series of N-of-1 trials, included 21 participants who had a history of neuropathic plantar forefoot ulcers. Participants were recruited from two public hospitals and one private podiatry clinic in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. This trial is non-randomised and unblinded. Participants will be recruited from three sites, including two high-risk foot services and a private podiatry clinic in Sydney, Australia. Mobilemat™ and F-Scan® plantar pressure mapping systems by TekScan® (Boston, USA) will be used to measure barefoot and in-shoe plantar pressures. Participants' self-reports will be used to quantify the wearing period over a certain period of between 2 and 4 weeks during the trial. Participant preference toward footwear, insole design and quality-of-life-related information will be collected and analysed. The descriptive and inferential statistical analyses will be performed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 27). And the software NVivo (version 12) will be utilised for the qualitative data analysis.
DISCUSSION: This is the first trial assessing footwear and insole interventions in people with diabetes by using a series of N-of-1 trials. Reporting self-declared wearing periods and participants' preferences on footwear style and aesthetics are the important approaches for this trial. Patient-centric device designs are the key to therapeutic outcomes, and this study is designed with that strategy in mind.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620000699965p. Registered on June 23, 2020.
METHODS: Sixty-one patients with mTBI (Glasgow Coma Scale score 13-15) were recruited prospectively, categorized according to baseline computed tomography findings, and subjected to neuropsychological assessment at initial admission (n = 61) as well as at a 6-month follow-up (n = 30). The paired t test, Cohen's d effect size calculation, and repeated-measures analysis of variance were used to establish the differences between the 2 groups in terms of neuropsychological performance.
RESULTS: A trend toward poorer neuropsychological performance among the patients with complicated mTBI was observed during admission; however, performance in this group improved over time. In contrast, the uncomplicated mTBI group showed slower recovery, especially in tasks of memory, visuospatial processing, and executive functions, at follow-up.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that despite the broad umbrella designation of mTBI, the current classification schemes of injury severity for mild neurotrauma should be revisited. They also raise questions about the clinical relevance of both traumatic focal lesions and the absence of visible traumatic lesions on brain imaging studies in patients with milder forms of head trauma.