Literature DB >> 21944067

Custom-molded foot-orthosis intervention and multisegment medial foot kinematics during walking.

Stephen C Cobb1, Laurie L Tis, Jeffrey T Johnson, Yong Tai Wang, Mark D Geil.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Foot-orthosis (FO) intervention to prevent and treat numerous lower extremity injuries is widely accepted clinically. However, the results of quantitative gait analyses have been equivocal. The foot models used, participants receiving intervention, and orthoses used might contribute to the variability.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of a custom-molded FO intervention on multisegment medial foot kinematics during walking in participants with low-mobile foot posture.
DESIGN: Crossover study.
SETTING: University biomechanics and ergonomics laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen participants with low-mobile foot posture (7 men, 9 women) were assigned randomly to 1 of 2 FO groups. INTERVENTION(S): After a 2-week period to break in the FOs, individuals participated in a gait analysis that consisted of 5 successful walking trials (1.3 to 1.4 m/s) during no-FO and FO conditions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Three-dimensional displacements during 4 subphases of stance (loading response, midstance, terminal stance, preswing) were computed for each multisegment foot model articulation.
RESULTS: Repeated-measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs) revealed that rearfoot complex dorsiflexion displacement during midstance was greater in the FO than the no-FO condition (F(1,14) = 5.24, P = .04, partial η(2) = 0.27). Terminal stance repeated-measures ANOVA results revealed insert-by-insert condition interactions for the first metatarsophalangeal joint complex (F(1,14) = 7.87, P = .01, partial η(2) = 0.36). However, additional follow-up analysis did not reveal differences between the no-FO and FO conditions for the balanced traditional orthosis (F(1,14) = 4.32, P = .08, partial η(2) = 0.38) or full-contact orthosis (F(1,14) = 4.10, P = .08, partial η(2) = 0.37).
CONCLUSIONS: Greater rearfoot complex dorsiflexion during midstance associated with FO intervention may represent improved foot kinematics in people with low-mobile foot postures. Furthermore, FO intervention might partially correct dysfunctional kinematic patterns associated with low-mobile foot postures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21944067      PMCID: PMC3419147          DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-46.4.358

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Athl Train        ISSN: 1062-6050            Impact factor:   2.860


  17 in total

1.  The mechanics of the foot. I. The joints.

Authors:  J H HICKS
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  1953-10       Impact factor: 2.610

2.  Mechanics and control of the flat versus normal foot during the stance phase of walking.

Authors:  Adrienne E Hunt; Richard M Smith
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.063

3.  In vitro study of foot kinematics using a dynamic walking cadaver model.

Authors:  C J Nester; A M Liu; E Ward; D Howard; J Cocheba; T Derrick; P Patterson
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2006-11-01       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Subtalar neutral position as an offset for a kinematic model of the foot during walking.

Authors:  Jeff R Houck; Josh M Tome; Deborah A Nawoczenski
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 2.840

5.  Invasive in vivo measurement of rear-, mid- and forefoot motion during walking.

Authors:  P Lundgren; C Nester; A Liu; A Arndt; R Jones; A Stacoff; P Wolf; A Lundberg
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2007-12-21       Impact factor: 2.840

6.  The effect of soft foot orthotics on three-dimensional lower-limb kinematics during walking and running.

Authors:  J J Eng; M R Pierrynowski
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1994-09

7.  Consistency of visual assessments of arch height among clinicians.

Authors:  D N Cowan; J R Robinson; B H Jones; D W Polly; B H Berrey
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 2.827

8.  A joint coordinate system for the clinical description of three-dimensional motions: application to the knee.

Authors:  E S Grood; W J Suntay
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 2.097

9.  Effects of arch height of the foot on angular motion of the lower extremities in running.

Authors:  B M Nigg; G K Cole; W Nachbauer
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 2.712

Review 10.  Kinematics of the ankle and foot. In vivo roentgen stereophotogrammetry.

Authors:  A Lundberg
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand Suppl       Date:  1989
View more
  4 in total

1.  The feasibility of a modified shoe for multi-segment foot motion analysis: a preliminary study.

Authors:  J Halstead; A M Keenan; G J Chapman; A C Redmond
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 2.303

2.  Biomechanical Effect of Foot Orthoses on Rearfoot Motions and Joint Moment Parameters in Patients with Flexible Flatfoot.

Authors:  KiHoon Han; Kangho Bae; Nicholas Levine; JungOk Yang; Joong-Sook Lee
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2019-08-08

3.  Different Design Feature Combinations of Flatfoot Orthosis on Plantar Fascia Strain and Plantar Pressure: A Muscle-Driven Finite Element Analysis With Taguchi Method.

Authors:  Yinghu Peng; Yan Wang; Duo Wai-Chi Wong; Tony Lin-Wei Chen; Shane Fei Chen; Guoxin Zhang; Qitao Tan; Ming Zhang
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-03-10

4.  Foot orthoses for adults with flexible pes planus: a systematic review.

Authors:  Helen A Banwell; Shylie Mackintosh; Dominic Thewlis
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2014-04-05       Impact factor: 2.303

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.