ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06057428B-ATLASUpdated Jun 3, 2026

Activity Levels Amongst Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

An observational study in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis, sponsored by Region Zealand. Recruiting at 2 sites in Denmark. Open to participants aged 65 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-06-03.

Sponsored by Region Zealand · Observational

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Sep 2023; still recruiting 3 years 1 month later.
Study type
Observational
Model
Case-crossover
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
80
Ages
65 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is one of the most common degenerative diseases of the spinal column, with symptoms including low back pain which worsens with ambulation, poor balance, decreased activity due to pain, and a marked decrease in quality of life (QoL). Prevalence rises with age, and current treatment options range from varied conservative management strategies, to surgical intervention with decompression of neural structures.

While the effects of surgical decompression on back pain and QoL has been widely researched, the effects of surgery on activity levels is less well understood. Though patients generally have subjective improvements in this parameter after surgery, objective measurements in this patient group have been lacking.

This study aims to investigate the effects of decompressive surgery on activity levels in elderly patients with LSS. Measurements of activity will be taken before and after decompressive surgery, as well as with regular intervals during a two-year follow-up period.

A better understanding of the effect that LSS has on activity may lead to more patients being able to receive surgical treatment, which is hypothesized to lead to an increase in QoL and less perceived disability amongst this patient group.

Read the detailed description

Disease background:

While lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is one of the most common degenerative diseases of the spinal column, there is no universally accepted definition of LSS, and no accepted radiologic diagnostic criteria. LSS most often refers to a narrowing in the central canal of the vertebrae, the lateral recess, or the neural foramen. Changes to these can occur due to acquired degenerative spondylosis or spondylolisthesis, or more rarely due to conditions such as ankylosing spondylitis and space-occupying lesions, or congenital abnormalities. LSS can be classified according to anatomical location, etiology or severity of narrowing, though no validated classification has been published.

The lack of concrete definition has caused difficulties in estimating the prevalence of LSS. Studies using community-based sampling has shown a prevalence of acquired LSS, defined as a narrowing of the central canal to ≤ 10mm in the anterior-posterior (AP) direction, of 7.3%. The prevalence has been shown to rise with age, from 4.0% affected at \< 40 years of age, to 14.3% amongst patients ≥ 60. No significant differences have been observed in overall prevalence according to gender, although there seems to be a slightly higher prevalence amongst elderly females than males.

Although LSS is often asymptomatic, common symptoms of LSS include low back pain, which worsens with prolonged ambulation, lumbar extension and standing, and which is relieved by rest and forward flexion, as well as lumbar radiculopathy. Patients may also complain of poor balance, and physical examination findings may include a wide-based gait and abnormal Romberg results. Symptoms are thought to occur due to compression of microvascular structures in the nerves, allowing for neural ischemia and defects in nerve conduction, and venous pooling resulting in inadequate oxygenation and metabolite accumulation.

Current treatment options for LSS range across both conservative and surgical management strategies. Conservative management has traditionally been regarded as first-line treatment, with a combination approach of physical therapy and pharmacological treatment with NSAIDs and analgesics. Epidural steroid injections have been used for symptom management, though with limited short and long-term benefits. Surgical management is often indicated in patients with ongoing pain despite attempts at conservative management for 3-6 months. Choice of surgical strategy to relieve the pressure on the neural structures depends on the anatomical location of stenosis and number of stenotic segments, as well as the intraoperative assessment of stability.

The effect of surgical decompression on disability, leg pain and back pain has been widely evaluated, but studies of the effect on postural control are sparse. The present study aims to investigate the effect of surgical decompression of symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis on postural control by assessment of sway measures before and after surgery.

Activity levels:

Physical activity (PA) has been demonstrated to be correlated to physical and mental wellbeing, having been shown to offer significant benefits including preventing and managing cardiovascular disease, cancer, and diabetes, as well as reducing symptoms of depression and anxiety. A dose-response relationship has been observed, and while all PA can be beneficial, higher levels can have more positive effects. Likewise, the negative consequences of sedentary behaviour are well established, hereunder increasing risks of metabolic and musculoskeletal disorders as well as all-cause mortality. As such, PA as both an intervention tool and as a measurement of effect has been becoming increasingly prevalent in the literature.

It is currently recommended that adults should undertake regular PA, with a minimum of 150-300 min of moderate-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) every week. Adults who do not achieve this can be classified as physically inactive. It is worth keeping in mind though, that no definition of MVPA exists, as such a definition would need to be highly individualized.

Efforts have been made to quantify PA in the context of research; the doubly labelled water (DLW) technique has been shown to be highly accurate in measuring total daily energy expenditure and is considered the gold standard when measuring activity levels. However, as this technique is expensive, time-intensive and imposes a high degree of subject interference, it is not practical for large-scale studies.

Other measurements of activity have been developed and validated, including self-report questionnaires, self-report activity diaries, direct observation, and the use of devices such as accelerometers, pedometers, heart-rate monitors, and armbands. Among these, the use of accelerometers as an activity monitoring device has become increasingly prevalent due to the high frequency of measurements, large memory capacity, low subject interference and ability to differentiate between differing levels of activity. Accelerometer use has likewise been recommended as a clinical measurement of PA when undertaking intervention studies and has seen a rise in use in the field of orthopaedics.

Patients with LSS are often classified as physically inactive due to the ambulatory limitations that symptomatic LSS can present with, and rarely meet the abovementioned recommendations for PA, despite evidence suggesting the benefits of PA for LSS patients. Previous studies have not been able to prove a significant effect of decompressive surgery on activity levels for LSS patients six months post-operatively, measured by accelerometer. However, while comparable studies on patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty likewise found no significant improvement in activity levels after six months, studies with longer follow-up, up to a year post-operatively, have been able to show an activity level comparable to healthy control individuals. Likewise, studies measuring activity levels on LSS patients undergoing decompressive surgery using pedometer readings have been able to show a significant increase in activity after 12 months.

Activity monitoring device:

The ActiGraph wGT3X-BT is a triaxial accelerometer, recording inertia in three planes at a sampling rate up to 100 Hz. A proprietary filter can be applied to eliminate artifacts due to movement not caused by human activity, and data is summed as a total activity count per minute, which can then be used to estimate PAEE and MVPA. The wGT3X-BT has been widely validated against gold standard measurements such as DLW, and in appropriate patient groups such as the elderly, and has been shown to be valid and reliable in assessing physical activity intensity.

Rationale of the study:

This study will be the first to correlate the effects of decompressive surgery in patients with symptomatic LSS with activity levels, and associated quality of life increases. Previous studies have been hampered by low power due to sampling size limitations, and short follow-up regimes, both of which this study seeks to manage through multi-centre collaboration and inclusion, and a follow-up regime spanning two years from the time of surgery.

It is expected that the results of our study can facilitate an increased understanding of the role of activity when considering surgical management of symptomatic LSS patients, as well as enable targeted treatment of patients with LSS.

Research question:

Do elderly patients with symptomatic LSS, who have undergone decompressive surgery, show an improvement in activity level compared to pre-operative values?

02

Conditions studied

  • Lumbar Spinal Stenosis

Keywords

  • Spinal stenosis
  • Elderly
  • Activity
  • Surgery
03

In context

Spinal Stenosis

458 studies on the registry are indexed under Spinal Stenosis; 105 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 80 is below the median of 120 across 154 observational studies indexed under Spinal Stenosis.

Browse Spinal Stenosis studies →

Lead sponsor

Region Zealand is the lead sponsor of 12 studies on the registry; 4 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
65 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Patients over 65 years of age referred to decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age ≥ 65 years
  • Referred to decompressive spinal surgery due to symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis at ≥ 1 level
  • Central canal LSS grade B or C (Schizas classification) at ≥ 1 level by Magnetic Resonance Imaging
  • Minimum of 3 months of unsuccessful non-operative treatment

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Signs of or infection in the spinal column
  • Severe comorbidities incl. neurodegenerative conditions which may contribute to balance problems
  • Revision surgery (previous decompression surgery at the same vertebral level)
  • Spinal surgery up to 1 year prior to the date of inclusion
  • (MMSE) score of ≤ 27 points
  • Degenerative spondylolisthesis more than 3mm on pre-operative imaging diagnostics
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Cancer (malignancy)

Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.

Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.

MMSE and MoCA

Short tests of memory and thinking, each scored out of 30. Lower scores suggest more difficulty; criteria give a range, either to include people with memory problems or to leave them out.

05

Study design

Observational model
Case-crossover
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
80 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Patients with lumbar spinal stenosis

    Patients diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis and referred to operation. Measurements of activity levels will be undertaken before operation, and compared to after operation.

    Procedure: Decompressive surgery

Interventions

  • ProcedureDecompressive surgery

    Decompressive surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Activity level

    Activity level, measured by total activity counts per day (TAC/d)

    Time frame: Before surgery and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery

Secondary outcomes

  1. Physical activity

    Physical activity, measured by time spent in MVPA (minutes/day)

    Time frame: Before surgery and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery

  2. Physical activity

    Physical activity, measured by physical activity energy expenditure (PAEE) (Kilojoules/d)

    Time frame: Before surgery and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery

  3. Physical inactivity

    Physical inactivity, measured by sedentary time (hours/d)

    Time frame: Before surgery and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery

  4. Quality of life

    Subjective QoL, measured by European Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions score (EQ-5D) The EQ-5D consists of six questions regarding current perceived health status and quality of life. Questions 1 - 5 have a range of 1 to 3, lower is better. The answer to questions 6 is given on a scale of 0 to 100, where lower is better.

    Time frame: Before surgery and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery

  5. Functional disability

    Subjective functional disability, measured by Zurich Claudication Questionnaire score (ZCQ) The ZCQ consists of 12 questions for all patients, and a further six questions for patients who have received treatment. The questionnaire is divided into three subscales: Symptom severity scale (questions 1 - 7): range of the score is 1 to 5, lower is better. Physical function scale (questions 8 - 12): range of the score is 1 to 4, lower is better. Satisfaction with treatment scale (questions 13 - 18): range of the score is 1 to 4, lower is better.

    Time frame: Before surgery and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery

  6. Self-reported activity

    Self-reported activity, measured by International Physical Activity Questionnaire - Short Form score (IPAQ-SF) The IPAQ-SF is a short form health survey consisting of 4 questions relating to self-reported physical activity during the last week. Each question asks the participant to note how many days during the past week that they carried out vigorous, moderate, light, or sedentary activity. If the number of days is greater or equal to 1, the participant is asked to estimate the amount of hours and minutes they have spent doing that activity.

    Time frame: Before surgery and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery

  7. Quality of life

    Subjective Quality-of-life, measured by the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). The SF-36 is a short form questionnaire concerning patients perceived health and quality-of-life (QoL). It consists of 36 questions regarding various aspects of the patients health status, including current and past perceived physical and mental health, and subjective physical function. Questions 1,2 and 20 - 22 each have a range of 1 to 5, lower is better. Question 32 likewise has a range of 1 - 5, though where higher is better. Questions 3 - 12 have a range of 1 - 3, higher is better. Questions 13 - 19 have a range of 1 - 2, higher is better. Questions 23 - 31 and 33 - 36 have a range of 1 - 5. The better score depends on the specific question.

    Time frame: Before surgery and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after surgery

07

Study locations

1 of 2 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Binder DK, Schmidt MH, Weinstein PR. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Semin Neurol. 2002 Jun;22(2):157-66. doi: 10.1055/s-2002-36539. PubMed 12524561 ↗
  • Schroeder GD, Kurd MF, Vaccaro AR. Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: How Is It Classified? J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2016 Dec;24(12):843-852. doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-15-00034. PubMed 27849674 ↗
  • Yabuki S, Fukumori N, Takegami M, Onishi Y, Otani K, Sekiguchi M, Wakita T, Kikuchi S, Fukuhara S, Konno S. Prevalence of lumbar spinal stenosis, using the diagnostic support tool, and correlated factors in Japan: a population-based study. J Orthop Sci. 2013 Nov;18(6):893-900. doi: 10.1007/s00776-013-0455-5. Epub 2013 Aug 21. PubMed 23963588 ↗
  • Katz JN, Dalgas M, Stucki G, Katz NP, Bayley J, Fossel AH, Chang LC, Lipson SJ. Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Diagnostic value of the history and physical examination. Arthritis Rheum. 1995 Sep;38(9):1236-41. doi: 10.1002/art.1780380910. PubMed 7575718 ↗
  • Lurie J, Tomkins-Lane C. Management of lumbar spinal stenosis. BMJ. 2016 Jan 4;352:h6234. doi: 10.1136/bmj.h6234. PubMed 26727925 ↗
  • Lee BH, Moon SH, Suk KS, Kim HS, Yang JH, Lee HM. Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Pathophysiology and Treatment Principle: A Narrative Review. Asian Spine J. 2020 Oct;14(5):682-693. doi: 10.31616/asj.2020.0472. Epub 2020 Oct 14. PubMed 33108834 ↗
  • Mazanec DJ, Podichetty VK, Hsia A. Lumbar canal stenosis: start with nonsurgical therapy. Cleve Clin J Med. 2002 Nov;69(11):909-17. doi: 10.3949/ccjm.69.11.909. PubMed 12430977 ↗
  • Liu K, Liu P, Liu R, Wu X, Cai M. Steroid for epidural injection in spinal stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2015 Jan 30;9:707-16. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S78070. eCollection 2015. PubMed 25678775 ↗
  • Kovacs FM, Urrutia G, Alarcon JD. Surgery versus conservative treatment for symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Sep 15;36(20):E1335-51. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31820c97b1. PubMed 21311394 ↗
  • Sengupta DK, Herkowitz HN. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Treatment strategies and indications for surgery. Orthop Clin North Am. 2003 Apr;34(2):281-95. doi: 10.1016/s0030-5898(02)00069-x. PubMed 12914268 ↗
  • Aadahl M, Kjaer M, Jorgensen T. Associations between overall physical activity level and cardiovascular risk factors in an adult population. Eur J Epidemiol. 2007;22(6):369-78. doi: 10.1007/s10654-006-9100-3. Epub 2007 Feb 28. PubMed 17333472 ↗
  • Park JH, Moon JH, Kim HJ, Kong MH, Oh YH. Sedentary Lifestyle: Overview of Updated Evidence of Potential Health Risks. Korean J Fam Med. 2020 Nov;41(6):365-373. doi: 10.4082/kjfm.20.0165. Epub 2020 Nov 19. PubMed 33242381 ↗
  • Bull FC, Al-Ansari SS, Biddle S, Borodulin K, Buman MP, Cardon G, Carty C, Chaput JP, Chastin S, Chou R, Dempsey PC, DiPietro L, Ekelund U, Firth J, Friedenreich CM, Garcia L, Gichu M, Jago R, Katzmarzyk PT, Lambert E, Leitzmann M, Milton K, Ortega FB, Ranasinghe C, Stamatakis E, Tiedemann A, Troiano RP, van der Ploeg HP, Wari V, Willumsen JF. World Health Organization 2020 guidelines on physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Br J Sports Med. 2020 Dec;54(24):1451-1462. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2020-102955. PubMed 33239350 ↗
  • Tremblay MS, Aubert S, Barnes JD, Saunders TJ, Carson V, Latimer-Cheung AE, Chastin SFM, Altenburg TM, Chinapaw MJM; SBRN Terminology Consensus Project Participants. Sedentary Behavior Research Network (SBRN) - Terminology Consensus Project process and outcome. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2017 Jun 10;14(1):75. doi: 10.1186/s12966-017-0525-8. PubMed 28599680 ↗
  • MacIntosh BR, Murias JM, Keir DA, Weir JM. What Is Moderate to Vigorous Exercise Intensity? Front Physiol. 2021 Sep 22;12:682233. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2021.682233. eCollection 2021. PubMed 34630133 ↗
  • Melanson EL Jr, Freedson PS. Physical activity assessment: a review of methods. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 1996 May;36(5):385-96. doi: 10.1080/10408399609527732. PubMed 8725670 ↗
  • Westerterp KR. Assessment of physical activity: a critical appraisal. Eur J Appl Physiol. 2009 Apr;105(6):823-8. doi: 10.1007/s00421-009-1000-2. Epub 2009 Feb 11. PubMed 19205725 ↗
  • Sylvia LG, Bernstein EE, Hubbard JL, Keating L, Anderson EJ. Practical guide to measuring physical activity. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2014 Feb;114(2):199-208. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2013.09.018. Epub 2013 Nov 28. No abstract available. PubMed 24290836 ↗
  • Sliepen M, Lipperts M, Tjur M, Mechlenburg I. Use of accelerometer-based activity monitoring in orthopaedics: benefits, impact and practical considerations. EFORT Open Rev. 2020 Jan 28;4(12):678-685. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180041. eCollection 2019 Dec. PubMed 32010456 ↗
  • Norden J, Smuck M, Sinha A, Hu R, Tomkins-Lane C. Objective measurement of free-living physical activity (performance) in lumbar spinal stenosis: are physical activity guidelines being met? Spine J. 2017 Jan;17(1):26-33. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.10.016. Epub 2016 Oct 25. PubMed 27793759 ↗
  • Smuck M, Muaremi A, Zheng P, Norden J, Sinha A, Hu R, Tomkins-Lane C. Objective measurement of function following lumbar spinal stenosis decompression reveals improved functional capacity with stagnant real-life physical activity. Spine J. 2018 Jan;18(1):15-21. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.08.262. Epub 2017 Sep 28. PubMed 28962914 ↗
  • Harding P, Holland AE, Delany C, Hinman RS. Do activity levels increase after total hip and knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014 May;472(5):1502-11. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3427-3. Epub 2013 Dec 19. PubMed 24353051 ↗
  • von Rottkay E, Rackwitz L, Rudert M, Noth U, Reichert JC. Function and activity after minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty compared to a healthy population. Int Orthop. 2018 Feb;42(2):297-302. doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3541-z. Epub 2017 Jul 12. PubMed 28702750 ↗
  • Schulte TL, Schubert T, Winter C, Brandes M, Hackenberg L, Wassmann H, Liem D, Rosenbaum D, Bullmann V. Step activity monitoring in lumbar stenosis patients undergoing decompressive surgery. Eur Spine J. 2010 Nov;19(11):1855-64. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1324-y. Epub 2010 Feb 26. PubMed 20186442 ↗
  • Chomistek AK, Yuan C, Matthews CE, Troiano RP, Bowles HR, Rood J, Barnett JB, Willett WC, Rimm EB, Bassett DR Jr. Physical Activity Assessment with the ActiGraph GT3X and Doubly Labeled Water. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2017 Sep;49(9):1935-1944. doi: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000001299. PubMed 28419028 ↗
  • Bammann K, Thomson NK, Albrecht BM, Buchan DS, Easton C. Generation and validation of ActiGraph GT3X+ accelerometer cut-points for assessing physical activity intensity in older adults. The OUTDOOR ACTIVE validation study. PLoS One. 2021 Jun 3;16(6):e0252615. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252615. eCollection 2021. PubMed 34081715 ↗
  • Aguilar-Farias N, Peeters GMEEG, Brychta RJ, Chen KY, Brown WJ. Comparing ActiGraph equations for estimating energy expenditure in older adults. J Sports Sci. 2019 Jan;37(2):188-195. doi: 10.1080/02640414.2018.1488437. Epub 2018 Jun 18. PubMed 29912666 ↗
  • Zielinski OB, Hallager DW, Jensen KY, Carreon L, Andersen MO, Diederichsen LP, Bech RD. Multicentre investigation on the effect of decompressive surgery on Balance and physical ActiviTy Levels amongst patients with lumbar Spinal stenosis (B-ATLAS): protocol for a prospective cohort study. BMJ Open. 2024 Sep 23;14(9):e085667. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-085667. PubMed 39313282 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — All deidentified individual participant data collected during the trial will be made available to researchers who provide a methodologically sound proposal for use, subject to approval by the study authors.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Analytic code

Time frame: A deidentified copy of all individual participant data will be kept by the authors of the study for 10 years following study end. After this time period, the full data set will be archived by the Danish National Archives with no planned end date.

Access criteria: Reasonable request for access can be made by writing to ozi@regionsjaelland.dk or rudb@regionsjaelland.dk in a time period consisting of 10 years after study end. After this period, requests for access can be made to the Danish National Archives at data@sa.dk.

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Sep 2023 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Aug 2028, 59 months after the start.

Of 62 non-industry observational studies under Spinal Stenosis, half reached primary completion within 43 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 21 and three quarters within 84. This study's planned 59 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 78 studies reached it within 51 months; a quarter within 23 and three quarters within 84.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Sep 11, 2023
First posted
Sep 28, 2023
StartActual
Sep 21, 2023
Primary completionEst.
Aug 2028
CompletionEst.
Dec 2028
Last update
Jun 3, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 3, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06057428
Lead sponsor
Region Zealand
Collaborators
Region Syddanmark
Responsible party
Oliver Bremerskov Zielinski (Principal Investigator, Region Zealand) — Principal investigator
First posted
Sep 28, 2023
Start date
Sep 21, 2023
Primary completion
Aug 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Jun 3, 2026

Study contacts

Oliver B Zielinski, MD
Contact
ozi@regionsjaelland.dk
+4593931049
Rune D Bech, MD, PhD
Contact
rudb@regionsjaelland.dk
+4593931049
Oliver B Zielinski, MD
principal investigator · Orthopaedic Department, Zealand University Hospital

Oversight

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

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

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