Hadi Rahemi1, David G Armstrong1,2, Ana Enriquez1,2, Joshua Owl2, Talal K Talal3, Bijan Najafi1,2. 1. 1 Interdisciplinary Consortium on Advanced Motion Performance (iCAMP), Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. 2. 2 Southern Arizona Limb Salvage Alliance (SALSA), Department of Surgery, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA. 3. 3 Diabetic Foot and Wound Clinic, Hamad Medical CO, Doha, Qatar.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the impact of shoe closure on plantar thermal stress response (TSR), which is known to be a surrogate of shear stress and skin perfusion. It is aimed to explore potential impact of shoe closure on increasing risk factors associated with plantar ulcers in people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). METHODS: Fifteen eligible subjects were enrolled. The left foot was used as a reference and fitted to a self-adjusted and habitual lace-tightening method by each subject. The right foot was used as a test closure and fitted into three lace closure conditions: loose, tight, and preset optimal closure (reel clutch, BOA technology). Thermal images were taken after 5 minutes of acclimatization (pre-trial) and immediately after 200 walking steps in each shoe closure condition (post-trial). TSR was calculated from the thermal images. RESULTS: TSR was significantly higher in the test closure with loose (70.24%, P = .000) and tight (66.85%, P = .007) and lower (-206.53%, P = .000) in the preset optimal closure when compared to the reference closure. Only lace closure conditions affected TSR with no significant impact from age, BMI, and gender in our sample in a multivariable regression model. CONCLUSION: The results from this study suggest that shoelace closure technique can have a profound effect on TSR. It therefore stands to reason that optimal lace closure may have an impact in reducing risk of plantar ulcers in people with DPN. Interestingly, results revealed that even a self-adjusted lace closure may not be necessarily optimal and a preset closure setting like reel clutch might ultimately be recommended to minimize risk. Further study is warranted to confirm or refute these interesting results.
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the impact of shoe closure on plantar thermal stress response (TSR), which is known to be a surrogate of shear stress and skin perfusion. It is aimed to explore potential impact of shoe closure on increasing risk factors associated with plantar ulcers in people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). METHODS: Fifteen eligible subjects were enrolled. The left foot was used as a reference and fitted to a self-adjusted and habitual lace-tightening method by each subject. The right foot was used as a test closure and fitted into three lace closure conditions: loose, tight, and preset optimal closure (reel clutch, BOA technology). Thermal images were taken after 5 minutes of acclimatization (pre-trial) and immediately after 200 walking steps in each shoe closure condition (post-trial). TSR was calculated from the thermal images. RESULTS: TSR was significantly higher in the test closure with loose (70.24%, P = .000) and tight (66.85%, P = .007) and lower (-206.53%, P = .000) in the preset optimal closure when compared to the reference closure. Only lace closure conditions affected TSR with no significant impact from age, BMI, and gender in our sample in a multivariable regression model. CONCLUSION: The results from this study suggest that shoelace closure technique can have a profound effect on TSR. It therefore stands to reason that optimal lace closure may have an impact in reducing risk of plantar ulcers in people with DPN. Interestingly, results revealed that even a self-adjusted lace closure may not be necessarily optimal and a preset closure setting like reel clutch might ultimately be recommended to minimize risk. Further study is warranted to confirm or refute these interesting results.
Authors: Bijan Najafi; Gurtej S Grewal; Manish Bharara; Robert Menzies; Talal K Talal; David G Armstrong Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2016-08-10
Authors: J Bradford Rice; Urvi Desai; Alice Kate G Cummings; Howard G Birnbaum; Michelle Skornicki; Nathan B Parsons Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2013-11-01 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Bijan Najafi; James S Wrobel; Gurtej Grewal; Robert A Menzies; Talal K Talal; Mahmoud Zirie; David G Armstrong Journal: J Aging Res Date: 2012-07-30
Authors: Peter A Lazzarini; Ryan T Crews; Jaap J van Netten; Sicco A Bus; Malindu E Fernando; Paul J Chadwick; Bijan Najafi Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2019-04-29
Authors: Hígor Chagas Cardoso; Ana Laura de Sene Amâncio Zara; Suélia de Siqueira Rodrigues Fleury Rosa; Gabriel Alves Rocha; João Victor Costa Rocha; Maria Clara Emos de Araújo; Pedro de Freitas Quinzani; Yaman Paula Barbosa; Fátima Mrué Journal: J Diabetes Res Date: 2019-09-09 Impact factor: 4.011
Authors: Jaap J van Netten; Peter A Lazzarini; David G Armstrong; Sicco A Bus; Robert Fitridge; Keith Harding; Ewan Kinnear; Matthew Malone; Hylton B Menz; Byron M Perrin; Klaas Postema; Jenny Prentice; Karl-Heinz Schott; Paul R Wraight Journal: J Foot Ankle Res Date: 2018-01-15 Impact factor: 2.303
Authors: Christopher Beach; Glen Cooper; Andrew Weightman; Emma F Hodson-Tole; Neil D Reeves; Alexander J Casson Journal: Sensors (Basel) Date: 2021-03-02 Impact factor: 3.576