Slip-resistant footwear reduces slips among National Health Service workers in England: a randomised controlled trial

Abstract

ObjectivesAssess the effectiveness of 5* GRIP-rated slip-resistant footwear in preventing slips in the workplace compared to usual footwear (control group).MethodsA multicentre, randomised controlled trial; 4553 National Health Service (NHS) staff were randomised 1:1 to the intervention group (provided with 5* GRIP-rated slip-resistant footwear) or the control group. The primary outcome of incidence rate of self-reported slips in the workplace over 14 weeks was analysed using a mixed-effects negative binomial model. Secondary outcome measures included incidence rate of falls from a slip, falls not from a slip, proportion of participants reporting a slip, fall or fracture and time to first slip and fall.Results6743 slips were reported: 2633 in the intervention group (mean 1.16 per participant, range 0 to 36) and 4110 in the control group (mean 1.80 per participant, range 0 to 83). There was a statistically significant reduction in slip rate in the intervention group relative to the control group (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.63, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.70, p<0.001). Statistically significant differences, in favour of the intervention group, were observed in falls from a slip (IRR 0.51, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.92, p=0.03), the proportion of participants who reported a slip (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.66, p<0.001) or fall (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.99, p=0.04) and time to first slip (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.80, p<0.001).ConclusionsThe offer and provision of 5* GRIP-rated footwear reduced slips in NHS staff in the workplace.Trial registration numberISRCTN33051393.

Relationship between age, workplace slips and the effectiveness of slip-resistant footwear among healthcare workers

“…After exclusions due to withdrawals and missing data, 4504 (2257 intervention, 2247 control) participants were included in the analysis. The full participant flow diagram6 and descriptions of all baseline variables2 are reported elsewhere.…”

“…The strengths and limitations of the SSHeW trial are discussed in detail elsewhere 2 6. Briefly, the main strengths of a robust methodology, large sample size and high engagement, generated high-quality data that can be used in secondary analyses such as that presented here.…”

“…Where no text messages were received, the number of slips as reported on the final 14 week questionnaire was used instead. Statistical analysis of the primary outcome used intention to treat 6. To ensure comparability with the original analysis, similar methods were used in the current analysis.…”

Footwear, Orthoses, and Insoles and Their Effects on Balance in Older Adults: A Scoping Review

“…Thies [56] found that by increasing the degree of the forefoot rocker, minimum toe clearance in older adult participants also increased. Menant [18,20,21] also found negligible differences in footwear that included either a flared or bevelled heel block compared to the control and other active comparator conditions Further research is required to determine which modification to sole geometry is most effective Outsole tread Menant [18][19][20][21] found that shoes with an outsole tread were neither beneficial nor detrimental to balance performance compared to the control conditions, suggesting that shoes with an outsole tread may be worthy of consideration as they do not seem to impair balance performance Outsole tread did not impact balance, however it is likely to influence slipping in wet conditions [72][73][74] and should therefore be a consideration in older adults Minimalist footwear Cudejko [55] reported that older adults with a history of falls had better performance in the Timed Up and Go and star excursion balance tests when in minimalist shoes compared to conventional footwear and barefoot condition, while Petersen [67] found minimalist shoes to increase local dynamic stability and reduce minimum toe clearance variability in older adults. However, Menz [26] found minimalist shoes to have no effects on temporo-spatial parameters in older women when compared to the control and comparator conditions…”