Use and usability of custom-made orthopedic shoes

The goal of this study was to investigate the use of custom-made orthopedic shoes (OS) and the association between the use of OS and the most relevant aspects of their usability. Over a 6-month period, patients meeting the inclusion criteria were recruited by 12 orthopedic shoe companies scattered throughout the Netherlands and asked to complete a questionnaire composed of a pre- and post-OS section. Patients with different pathologies were included in the study (n = 339; response 67%). Mean age of the patients was 63 +/- 15 years, and 38% were male. Three months after delivery, 81% of the patients used their OS frequently (4-7 days/week), 13% occasionally (1-3 days/week), and 6% did not use their OS. Associations were found between use and all measured aspects of usability (p-values varied from <0.001 to 0.028). Patients who used their OS more often had a more positive opinion regarding all the aspects of usability. We conclude that all aspects of the usability of OS are relevant in relation to their use and should be taken into account when prescribing and evaluating OS.

Long-term use of custom-made orthopedic shoes: A 1.5-year follow-up study

This study investigated long-term use of custom-made orthopedic shoes (OS) at 1.5 years follow-up. In addition, the association between short-term outcomes and long-term use was studied. Patients from a previously published study who did use their first-ever pair of OS 3 months after delivery received another questionnaire after 1.5 years. Patients with different pathologies were included in the study (n = 269, response = 86%). Mean age was 63 ± 14 years, and 38% were male. After 1.5 years, 87% of the patients still used their OS (78% frequently [4-7 days/week] and 90% occasionally [1-3 days/week]) and 13% of the patients had ceased using their OS. Patients who were using their OS frequently after 1.5 years had significantly higher scores for 8 of 10 short-term usability outcomes (p-values ranged from <0.001 to 0.046). The largest differences between users and nonusers were found for scores on the short-term outcomes of OS fit and communication with the medical specialist and shoe technician (effect size range = 0.16 to 0.46). We conclude that patients with worse short-term usability outcomes for their OS are more likely to use their OS only occasionally or not at all at long-term follow-up.

What influences a patients decision to use custom-made orthopaedic shoes?

Background Despite potential benefits, some patients decide not to use their custom-made orthopaedic shoes (OS). Factors are known in the domains ‘usability’, ‘communication and service’, and ‘opinion of others’ that influence a patient’s decision to use OS. However, the interplay between these factors has never been investigated. The aim of this study was to explore the interplay between factors concerning OS, and the influences thereof on a patient’s decision to use OS. Methods A mixed-methods design was used, combining qualitative and quantitative data by means of sequential data analysis and triangulation. Priority was given to the qualitative part. Qualitative data was gathered with a semi-structured interview covering the three domains. Data was analysed using the framework approach. Quantitative data concerned the interplay between factors and determining a rank-order for the importance of factors of ‘usability’. Results A patient’s decision to use OS was influenced by various factors indicated as being important and by acceptance of their OS. Factors of ‘usability’ were more important than factors of ‘communication’; the ‘opinion of others’ was of limited importance. An improvement of walking was indicated as the most important factor of ‘usability’. The importance of other factors (cosmetic appearance and ease of use) was determined by reaching a compromise between these factors and an improvement of walking. Conclusions A patient’s decision to use OS is influenced by various factors indicated as being important and by acceptance of their OS. An improvement of walking is the most important factor of ‘usability’, the importance of other factors (cosmetic appearance and ease of use) is determined by reaching compromises between these factors and an improvement of walking. Communication is essential to gain insight in a patient’s acceptance and in the compromises they are willing to reach. This makes communication the key for clinicians to influence a patient’s decision to use OS.

The profile of psychiatric symptoms exacerbated by methamphetamine use

Background Methamphetamine use can produce symptoms almost indistinguishable from schizophrenia. Distinguishing between the two conditions has been hampered by the lack of a validated symptom profile for methamphetamine-induced psychiatric symptoms. We use data from a longitudinal cohort study to examine the profile of psychiatric symptoms that are acutely exacerbated by methamphetamine use. Methods 164 methamphetamine users, who did not meet DSM-IV criteria for a lifetime primary psychotic disorder, were followed monthly for one year to assess the relationship between days of methamphetamine use and symptom severity on the 24-item Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale. Exacerbation of psychiatric symptoms with methamphetamine use was quantified using random coefficient models. The dimensions of symptom exacerbation were examined using principal axis factoring and a latent profile analysis. Results Symptoms exacerbated by methamphetamine loaded on three factors: positive psychotic symptoms (suspiciousness, unusual thought content, hallucinations, bizarre behavior); affective symptoms (depression, suicidality, guilt, hostility, somatic concern, self-neglect); and psychomotor symptoms (tension, excitement, distractibility, motor hyperactivity). Methamphetamine use did not significantly increase negative symptoms. Vulnerability to positive psychotic and affective symptom exacerbation was shared by 28% of participants, and this vulnerability aligned with a past year DSM-IV diagnosis of substance-induced psychosis (38% vs. 22%, _2 (df1) = 3.66, p = 0.056). Conclusion Methamphetamine use produced a symptom profile comprised of positive psychotic and affective symptoms, which aligned with a diagnosis of substance-induced psychosis, with no evidence of a negative syndrome.