CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04154098ScapOrthosisUpdated Dec 16, 2020

Evaluation of a Textile Scapula Orthosis

An interventional study of Scapula orthosis assistance and Manual scapula assistance in Muscular Dystrophies, Scapular Dyskinesis and Muscular Dystrophy, Facioscapulohumeral, sponsored by Swiss Federal Institute of Technology. Completed at 2 sites in 2 countries. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 99 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-12-16.

Sponsored by Swiss Federal Institute of Technology · Not applicable, Interventional, and Basic science

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
8
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 99 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Shoulder instability due to muscle weakness is a common problem in disorders of the upper extremities. During arm motion, the scapula acts as a dynamic base for the humeral head. To safely move the shoulder with an exoskeleton for the upper extremities a textile orthosis was developed that stabilizes the scapula against the thorax. The support level of the orthosis is continuously manually adjustable. To test the feasibility of our design and to improve the functionality of the textile orthosis, it needs to be investigated how the orthosis acts on people affected by shoulder instability. The investigators seek to explore how people with shoulder instability respond to the orthosis, and how they may benefit from the orthosis function. Therefore, the range of motion of arm elevation will be compared in different conditions: (i) without any support, (ii) with the support of a trained therapist, and (iii) when the device is engaged at the individual's optimal support level. Additionally, pilot tests will be performed to fix different parameters in our study protocol, such as the the optimal orthosis stiffness level and the ideal number of movement repetitions.

Read the detailed description

In this study, participants suffering from muscular weakness in the upper extremities, particularly the shoulder joint, will be recruited. A clear indicator for muscular weakness in the shoulder joint is a scapula alata (winging scapula). Hence, participants recruited for this study should present with a scapula alata and a limited RoM of at least one of their upper extremities.

This study is designed as a cross-over trial. Each participant will take part in an experimental session that will last approximately 2 hours. At the beginning of the experiment, the participant will be informed about the measurement and sign the informed consent sheet. Additional demographic data and level of ability will be collected in a questionnaire.

Before the measurements, participants will be fitted a textile scapula orthosis. The orthosis will be instrumented to quantify the amount of support the orthosis provides to the user. Therefore, an array of force sensors is mounted between the orthosis and the skin to measure the qualitative force distribution and its rate of change. To measure the absolute force applied to the plate, a load cell will be mounted on the orthosis fastening mechanism. All force data will be collected synchronously through a Micro-Controller board.

The participants will be equipped with reflective adhesive markers to define the reference points for the range of motion measurements, which will be done with a goniometer and photographic opto-electronic motion tracking.

Nine blocks of measurements will be conducted, lasting 5 minutes each. The remaining time in the study accounts for rest periods, the mounting and demounting of the orthosis, instructions and questionnaires. The first eight blocks will present the following treatment conditions in randomized order:

  • No support (NO): the scapula is not assisted during arm elevation.
  • Manual scapular assistance (SA): a trained person assists the scapula during arm elevation manually.
  • Orthosis support (OS): the scapula is assisted by the textile orthosis set to meaningfully different force levels.
  • Motor control task (MT): The participant reaches for a target placed at the maximum elevation height in the NO condition, once without and once with the orthosis.

While one block each is performed in the NO, SA and MT conditions, six blocks are performed in the OS condition with the orthosis set to meaningfully different force levels.

In each measurement set, participants will elevate their arms in one of two planes of horizontal rotation:

  • 30° (R30) as measured from the coronal body plane.
  • 80° (R80) as measured from the coronal body plane.

During arm elevation, the arm is fully extended, i.e. the elbow and wrist are fully stretched. In this position, the center of mass has the largest lever arm and therefore the maximum torque due to gravity occurs in the shoulder. One measurement set will be done in each elevation plane. During the OS condition, the orthosis will be opened between measurement sets to allow for comfort and unhindered breathing and to guarantee independence of measurement data.

After the experiment, the perceived exertion and orthosis comfort will be assessed using the Borg Scale and the Nordic Questionnaire.

Before the study, several study parameters will be determined in pilot studies with variable duration, not exceeding 2 hours. The participants in the pilot studies and the final study might be identical. During the pilot tests, participants will wear an orthosis similar to the one used in the study. Hence, effort and strain for participants will be equal or less to the final study. The pilot tests include

  • Definition of optimal pressure and protocol to consistently find this pressure.
  • Definition of optimal orthosis configuration.
  • Definition of repeatability when orthosis is unmounted and mounted again.
  • Definition of meaningful difference between pressure levels.
02

Conditions studied

  • Muscular Dystrophies
  • Scapular Dyskinesis
  • Muscular Dystrophy, Facioscapulohumeral
  • Muscle Weakness
  • Muscular Weakness
  • Muscular Dystrophy

Keywords

  • Scapula alata
  • Scapular winging
  • Scapula orthosis
  • Range of Motion
  • Movement control
  • Manual Scapula Assistance
03

In context

Muscular Dystrophies

548 studies on the registry are indexed under Muscular Dystrophies; 89 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 8 is below the median of 24 across 344 interventional studies indexed under Muscular Dystrophies.

Browse Muscular Dystrophies studies →

Lead sponsor

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology is the lead sponsor of 152 studies on the registry; 10 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 99 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • At least 18 years of age
  • Diagnosed scapula alata (winging scapula)
  • Limited range of motion of at least one of the upper extremities.
  • Ability to elevate the arm at least 110° passively
  • Able to sit in a chair without additional support and without leaning on the back rest.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria

  • Frozen shoulder
  • Osteoporosis or arthrosis of the shoulder joint
  • Shoulder subluxation
  • Excessive spasticity of the affected arm
  • Skin ulcerations on the paretic arm or torso
  • Known risk for impingement
  • Orthopaedic, rheumatological or other disease restricting movements of the paretic arm
  • Pain or stiffness in the shoulder joint limiting their movement
  • Cardiopulmonary disease
  • Psychiatric disorders or severe cognitive impairments that limit their ability to understand the study instructions
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Basic science
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
8 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    NO-OA-MA-FT

    Participants elevate their arm without assistance (NO) - with orthosis assistance (OA) - with manual assistance (MA) in the given order, followed by the functional task (FT)

    Device: Scapula orthosis assistance · Procedure: Manual scapula assistance · Other: No assistance · Other: Functional Test

  • Experimental
    NO-MA-OA-FT

    Participants elevate their arm without assistance (NO) - with orthosis assistance (OA) - with manual assistance (MA) in the given order, followed by the functional task (FT)

    Device: Scapula orthosis assistance · Procedure: Manual scapula assistance · Other: No assistance · Other: Functional Test

  • Experimental
    OA-NO-MA-FT

    Participants elevate their arm without assistance (NO) - with orthosis assistance (OA) - with manual assistance (MA) in the given order, followed by the functional task (FT)

    Device: Scapula orthosis assistance · Procedure: Manual scapula assistance · Other: No assistance · Other: Functional Test

  • Experimental
    OA-MA-NO-FT

    Participants elevate their arm without assistance (NO) - with orthosis assistance (OA) - with manual assistance (MA) in the given order, followed by the functional task (FT)

    Device: Scapula orthosis assistance · Procedure: Manual scapula assistance · Other: No assistance · Other: Functional Test

  • Experimental
    MA-NO-OA-FT

    Participants elevate their arm without assistance (NO) - with orthosis assistance (OA) - with manual assistance (MA) in the given order, followed by the functional task (FT)

    Device: Scapula orthosis assistance · Procedure: Manual scapula assistance · Other: No assistance · Other: Functional Test

  • Experimental
    MA-OA-NO-FT

    Participants elevate their arm without assistance (NO) - with orthosis assistance (OA) - with manual assistance (MA) in the given order, followed by the functional task (FT)

    Device: Scapula orthosis assistance · Procedure: Manual scapula assistance · Other: No assistance · Other: Functional Test

Interventions

  • DeviceScapula orthosis assistance

    Participants are elevating their arm while their scapula is assisted by the scapula orthosis

    Also known as: OA

  • ProcedureManual scapula assistance

    Participants are elevating their arm while their scapula is assisted by a trained personnel

    Also known as: MA

  • OtherNo assistance

    Participants are elevating their arm without being assisted

  • OtherFunctional Test

    Participants perform a functional test once without (NO) and once with (OA) the orthosis

    Also known as: FT

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Range of motion of arm elevation

    The maximum angle of arm elevation in the 80 or 30 degree plane the participant can reach under the different study conditions

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

  2. Improvement of range of motion of arm elevation

    The relative or absolute improvement of arm elevation in the orthosis assistance condition when compared to the without assistance condition and/or the manual assistance condition

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

  3. Range of motion of arm elevation for different force levels in the orthosis assistance condition

    Relative or absolute improvement in range of motion or range of motion of arm elevation for different force levels in the orthosis assistance condition

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

  4. Motor control during functional task

    Assessment of kinematic variables such as movement smoothness during the functional task

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

Secondary outcomes

  1. Beneficiary or Responsiveness level

    Identification of beneficiary/responsiveness threshold in the correlation between range of motion of arm elevation with orthosis assistance and without assistance

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

  2. Threshold for Beneficiary or Responsiveness level

    Correlation between beneficiary/responsiveness level and level of disability as assessed by the Manual Muscle Test (MMT, Jepsen 2004) and/or the Range of Motion Test (Nadeau 2007)

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

  3. Perceived effort

    Perceived effort (Borg Scale) of arm elevation for the different study conditions

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

  4. Motor control during arm elevation

    Assessment of kinematic variables such as movement smoothness for the different study conditions

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

  5. Comfort

    Assessment and comparison of discomfort during the different conditions (Modified short version of the Nordic Questionnaire)

    Time frame: Up to 2 hours per participant

07

Study locations

2 sites
  • Kliniken Schmieder Konstanz
    Konstanz, Basen-Wuerttemberg 78464, Germany
  • ETH Zurich
    Zurich, 8006, Switzerland
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Veeger HE, van der Helm FC. Shoulder function: the perfect compromise between mobility and stability. J Biomech. 2007;40(10):2119-29. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.10.016. Epub 2007 Jan 12. PubMed 17222853 ↗
  • Paine RM, Voight M. The role of the scapula. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993 Jul;18(1):386-91. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1993.18.1.386. PubMed 8348140 ↗
  • Ludewig PM, Reynolds JF. The association of scapular kinematics and glenohumeral joint pathologies. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009 Feb;39(2):90-104. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2009.2808. PubMed 19194022 ↗
  • Orrell RW, Copeland S, Rose MR. Scapular fixation in muscular dystrophy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Jan 20;2010(1):CD003278. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003278.pub2. PubMed 20091543 ↗
  • Vastamaki M, Pikkarainen V, Vastamaki H, Ristolainen L. Scapular Bracing is Effective in Some Patients but Symptoms Persist in Many Despite Bracing. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Aug;473(8):2650-7. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4310-1. Epub 2015 Apr 25. PubMed 25910775 ↗
  • Barnett ND, Mander M, Peacock JC, Bushby K, Gardner-Medwin D, Johnson GR. Winging of the scapula: the underlying biomechanics and an orthotic solution. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 1995;209(4):215-23. doi: 10.1243/PIME_PROC_1995_209_348_02. PubMed 8907215 ↗
  • Jepsen J, Laursen L, Larsen A, Hagert CG. Manual strength testing in 14 upper limb muscles: a study of inter-rater reliability. Acta Orthop Scand. 2004 Aug;75(4):442-8. doi: 10.1080/00016470410001222-1. PubMed 15370589 ↗
  • Nadeau S, Kovacs S, Gravel D, Piotte F, Moffet H, Gagnon D, Hebert LJ. Active movement measurements of the shoulder girdle in healthy subjects with goniometer and tape measure techniques: a study on reliability and validity. Physiother Theory Pract. 2007 May-Jun;23(3):179-87. doi: 10.1080/09593980701209246. PubMed 17558881 ↗
  • Georgarakis AM, Xiloyannis M, Dettmers C, Joebges M, Wolf P, Riener R. Reaching higher: External scapula assistance can improve upper limb function in humans with irreversible scapula alata. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2021 Sep 3;18(1):131. doi: 10.1186/s12984-021-00926-z. PubMed 34479574 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 16, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04154098
Lead sponsor
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 6, 2019
Start date
Nov 1, 2019
Primary completion
Jul 13, 2020
Completion
Jul 13, 2020
Last update
Dec 16, 2020

Study contacts

Robert Riener, Prof.
principal investigator · ETH Zurich

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Dec 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion