| Literature DB >> 31093504 |
Annamaria Salzano1, Fabiana Camuso1, Mario Sepe1, Maha Sellami2, Luca P Ardigò3, Johnny Padulo4,5,6,7.
Abstract
Several classical dance complex movements, such as pointe, require body weight to be supported properly to avoid risk of foot injury. Regarding the choice of toe cap for pointe shoes, it is unclear which type can better alleviate pain symptoms and toe deviation angle in dancers. The aim of the current crossover study was to investigate the acute effect of using different types of toe caps among well-trained professional dancers on pain perception and toe deviation angle. Ten young female professional dancers volunteered to participate in the study. Each participant was tested during two separate sessions with an interval of 72 h in between. Participants were tested in the two sessions with a standard commercial or a customized prototype toe cap, always with pointe shoes, and in randomized order. An anteroposterior X-ray examination was performed separately for each participant and a visual analogue scale for pain perception was administered following each situation (with a standard commercial or a customized prototype toe cap). Significant amelioration was obtained when a customized toe cap prototype was used both for toe deviation angle and for visual analogue scale. Use of a customized toe cap prototype compared to a standard one may acutely reduce both toe deviation angle and pain in elite female professional dancers.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31093504 PMCID: PMC6481146 DOI: 10.1155/2019/9515079
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Participants' data.
| ID | Body mass (kg) | Height (cm) | Age (y) | Training experience in dance (yrs) | Average training frequency (hrs/week) | Dominant foot | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subject 01 | 50.7 | 160 | 15 | 12 | 6 | Left | |
| Subject 02 | 62.7 | 163 | 17 | 14 | 20 | Right | |
| Subject 03 | 61.5 | 164 | 25 | 20 | 6 | Right | |
| Subject 04 | 49.0 | 158 | 22 | 17 | 10 | Right | |
| Subject 05 | 67.1 | 170 | 19 | 15 | 10.5 | Right | |
| Subject 06 | 54.6 | 160 | 21 | 15 | 10.5 | Right | |
| Subject 07 | 57.8 | 165 | 22 | 16 | 10.5 | Right | |
| Subject 08 | 52.8 | 156 | 16 | 12 | 12 | Right | |
| Subject 09 | 54.1 | 168 | 16 | 13 | 10 | Right | |
| Subject 10 | 47.7 | 165 | 13 | 10 | 8 | Right | |
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
|
| |||||||
|
| Onset of | ||||||
|
| Injury (other than | ||||||
Note
SD=Standard deviation.
Figure 1Toe caps: standard commercial toe cap (a), customized toe cap prototype (b), and pointe shoe (c).
Figure 2X-ray example: toe deviation angle with standard toe cap (a) and with customized toe cap (b).
Toe deviation angle and visual analogue scale of each participant.
| ID | TDA with STC (°) | TDA with CTC (°) | TDA difference (°) | VAS when dancers are on toes with STC | VAS when dancers are on toes with CTC | VAS difference | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Subject 01 | 29.4 | 18.1 | -11.3 | 8 | 4 | -4 | |
| Subject 02 | 22.3 | 17.7 | -5.6 | 5 | 2 | -3 | |
| Subject 03 | 18.8 | 17.7 | -1.1 | 9 | 5 | -4 | |
| Subject 04 | 24.2 | 17.7 | -6.5 | 7 | 5 | -2 | |
| Subject 05 | 21.9 | 13.9 | -8.0 | 4 | 2 | -2 | |
| Subject 06 | 21.9 | 14.4 | -7.5 | 2 | 0 | -2 | |
| Subject 07 | 17.8 | 14.3 | -3.5 | 5 | 2 | -3 | |
| Subject 08 | 15.8 | 12.6 | -3.2 | 5 | 1 | -4 | |
| Subject 09 | 13.1 | 9.6 | -3.5 | 4 | 0 | -4 | |
| Subject 10 | 13.0 | 4.2 | -8.8 | 5 | 2 | -3 | |
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |||||
Note
TDA=toe deviation angle; STC=standard toe cap; CTC=customized toe cap; VAS=visual analogue scale; SD=standard deviation.
Figure 3Toe deviation angle with standard toe cap and with customized toe cap for all participants. ∗∗ P=0.0002, ∗∗∗ P=0.00005.