Outcomes Achieved With Use of a Prefabricated Roll-On Total Contact Cast

Is TCC-EZ a Suitable Alternative to Gold Standard Total-Contact Casting?

BACKGROUND

The total-contact cast (TCC) is the gold standard for off-loading diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) given its nonremovable nature. However, this modality remains underused in clinical settings due to the time and experience required for appropriate application. The TCC-EZ is an alternative off-loading modality marketed as being nonremovable and having faster and easier application. This study aims to investigate the potential of the TCC-EZ to reduce foot plantar pressures.

METHODS

Twelve healthy participants (six males, six females) were fitted with a removable cast walker, TCC, TCC-EZ, and TCC-EZ with accompanying brace removed. These off-loading modalities were tested against a control. Pedar-X technology measured peak plantar pressures in each condition. Statistical analysis of four regions of the foot (rearfoot, midfoot, forefoot, and hallux) was conducted with Friedman and Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Significance was set at P < .05.

RESULTS

All of the off-loading conditions significantly reduced pressure compared with the control, except the TCC-EZ without the brace in the hallux region. There was no statistically significant difference between TCC-EZ and TCC peak pressure in any foot region. The TCC-EZ without the brace obtained significantly higher peak pressures than with the brace. The removable cast walker produced similar peak pressure reduction in the midfoot and forefoot but significantly higher peak pressures in the rearfoot and hallux.

CONCLUSIONS

The TCC-EZ is a viable alternative to the TCC. However, removal of the TCC-EZ brace results in minimal plantar pressure reduction, which might limit clinical applications of the TCC-EZ.

A Biomechanical Examination of Prefabricated Total Contact Cast Kits: Relevance to Patients With Diabetic Neuropathy

The traditional Total Contact Cast (TCC) is considered the gold standard for treating plantar diabetic ulcers. A number of prefabricated TCC kits have been introduced, which offer a user-friendly casting process for health care providers. Our objective was to evaluate pressure reduction and gait characteristics after application of a TCC kit (TCC-EZ) and traditional TCC. Fifteen individuals (9 males, 6 females; median age of 51.5 years [range = 40.5-71.2 years]) completed 30-m walking trials while fitted with TCC-EZ and TCC in a randomized order. A pair of automated wireless photogate sensors captured time to traverse the distance and pedobarographic insoles measured and recorded plantar pressures. Paired t tests were used to compare peak pressure, gait speed, and cast weights across the 2 modalities. Peak pressure and cast weight were significantly lower in the TCC-EZ arm (169.6 ± 41.3 kPa vs 214.9 ± 63.2 kPa, P = .0048; and 1.79 ± 0.17 kg vs 2.11 ± 0.25 kg, P = .0004). Contact area and gait speed were not significantly different between the 2 modalities (140.4 ± 25.8 cm2 vs 126.9 ± 37.8 cm2, P = .0228, Cohen’s d = 0.40; and 0.94 ± 0.19 m/s vs 0.83 ± 0.26 m/s, P = .0532, Cohen’s d = .48). TCC-EZ was found to provide more favorable pressure distributions compared with TCC. TCC-EZ is also lighter and may be a preferred treatment modality for patients. More research is necessary to reveal the clinical effectiveness of prefabricated total contact kits.

Effectiveness of offloading interventions to heal foot ulcers in persons with diabetes: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Offloading interventions are commonly used in clinical practice to heal foot ulcers. The aim of this updated systematic review is to investigate the effectiveness of offloading interventions to heal diabetic foot ulcers.

METHODS

We updated our previous systematic review search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases to also include original studies published between July 29, 2014 and August 13, 2018 relating to four offloading intervention categories in populations with diabetic foot ulcers: (a) offloading devices, (b) footwear, (c) other offloading techniques, and (d) surgical offloading techniques. Outcomes included ulcer healing, plantar pressure, ambulatory activity, adherence, adverse events, patient-reported measures, and cost-effectiveness. Included controlled studies were assessed for methodological quality and had key data extracted into evidence and risk of bias tables. Included non-controlled studies were summarised on a narrative basis.

RESULTS

We identified 41 studies from our updated search for a total of 165 included studies. Six included studies were meta-analyses, 26 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 13 other controlled studies, and 120 non-controlled studies. Five meta-analyses and 12 RCTs provided high-quality evidence for non-removable knee-high offloading devices being more effective than removable offloading devices and therapeutic footwear for healing plantar forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Total contact casts (TCCs) and non-removable knee-high walkers were shown to be equally effective. Moderate-quality evidence exists for removable knee-high and ankle-high offloading devices being equally effective in healing, but knee-high devices have a larger effect on reducing plantar pressure and ambulatory activity. Low-quality evidence exists for the use of felted foam and surgical offloading to promote healing of plantar forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Very limited evidence exists for the efficacy of any offloading intervention for healing plantar heel ulcers, non-plantar ulcers, and neuropathic ulcers with infection or ischemia.

CONCLUSION

Strong evidence supports the use of non-removable knee-high offloading devices (either TCC or non-removable walker) as the first-choice offloading intervention for healing plantar neuropathic forefoot and midfoot ulcers. Removable offloading devices, either knee-high or ankle-high, are preferred as second choice over other offloading interventions. The evidence bases to support any other offloading intervention is still weak and more high-quality controlled studies are needed in these areas.