| Literature DB >> 31921717 |
Wojciech Kiebzak1,2, Arkadiusz Żurawski1,2, Anna Zmyślna1,2, Justyna Pogorzelska1,2, Małgorzata Domagalska-Szopa3, Magdalena Hagner-Derengowska4, Andrzej Szopa5,6.
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Children who have survived cancer are at risk of experiencing adverse effects of the cancer or its treatments. One of the adverse effects may be the limitation of ankle dorsiflexion (DF), which may result in "toe walking." Although there is an increasing number of studies in pediatric oncology presenting evidences of different therapeutic interventions to improve DF function, none of these therapeutic interventions has been sufficiently documented. This case report shows the results of non-invasive neurodevelopmental treatment program combined with application of inhibiting casts in a pediatric cancer patient who presented with severe and persistent toe walking. The treatment was aimed to improve DF function and postural and gait pattern and to normalize weight distribution between forefoot and heel. Case Presentation: A 7-year-old girl with T-cell lymphoma, who presented with severe and persistent toe walking, was assessed 10 times over a course of 6 months by both clinical examination (ankle range of motion measurement) and neurophysiological measures (weight distribution between forefoot and hindfoot, postural sway, body posture, and gait). Outcomes: Neurodevelopmental treatment program combined with application of inhibiting casts for 3 months increased passive ankle DF by 10° in both lower limbs, normalized weight distribution between the forefoot and heel in both lower limbs, as well as established a heel-toe walking gait pattern. Improved ankle DF function and normalized postural and gait patterns were maintained in repeated examinations even 3 months after the removal inhibiting casts. Discussion: Early identification of toe walking in the female pediatric patient with T-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and early physiotherapy intervention were beneficial in terms of her body posture and gait pattern development. Non-invasive neurodevelopmental treatment program combined with application of inhibiting casts as described in this study can be useful for managing treatment side effects in pediatric cancer patients.Entities:
Keywords: DIERS formetric 4D; childhood cancer; gait disorders; physiotherapy; toe walking
Year: 2019 PMID: 31921717 PMCID: PMC6923223 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2019.00502
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Definitions of the selected postural indices, weight-bearing distribution on the support base, posturographic CoP shifts, and gait parameters obtained using DIERS Formetric 4D system for monitoring patient's improvement.
| Angle of kyphosis (KK) | (°) | The angle between the spinous process of C7 and the thoracic-lumbar inflection point |
| Angle of lordosis (LL) | (°) | The angle between the thoracic-lumbar inflection point and the midpoint between the two lumbar dimples |
| Trunk inclination (TI) | (mm) | The angle between the midpoint between the two lumbar dimples and the spinous process of C7 |
| Pelvic tilt (PT) | (°) | The angle between the line connecting C7 and S1 and the line connecting |
| Trunk surface rotation (TSR) | (°) | The angle of trunk surface rotation is contained between the line situated in the frontal plane and the line which connects two points on the back surface and is situated symmetrically on the left and right sides |
| LF | (%) | Percentage of load distribution for the left forefoot |
| RF | (%) | Percentage of load distribution for the right forefoot |
| LH | (%) | Percentage of load distribution for the left hindfoot |
| RH | (%) | Percentage of load distribution for the right hindfoot |
| Stance time | (% gait cycle) | Duration of the stance phase, expressed as the percentage of the gait cycle |
| Load response time | (% gait cycle) | Duration of load response phase, expressed as the percentage of the gait cycle |
| Single support | (% gait cycle) | Duration of single support phase, expressed as the percentage of the gait cycle |
| Preswing time | (% gait cycle) | Duration of preswing phase, expressed as the percentage of the gait cycle |
| Swing time (SwT) | (% gait cycle) | Duration of swing phase, expressed as the percentage of the gait cycle |
| Step time (Step) | (s) | Time interval between two successive instants of foot–floor contact during walking |
| Stride width (Stride) | (cm) | Distance between two lines dividing the feet into equal halves |
Figure 1The results of examination of body weight distribution between forefoot and hindfoot of both lower limbs and postural sway measurement based on CoP movement in pre- (right) and posttreatment (left) examination based on the assessment using DIERS pedoscan system.
Summary of the postural indices, weight-bearing distribution on the support base, and posturographic CoP shifts all the examinations (1st−11th examination) assessed using DIERS pedoscan.
| SP (cm) | 124.11 | 107.4 | 78.77 | 77.49 | 68.58 | 89.28 | 74.46 | 71.92 | 69.12 | 73.64 | 71.46 | 0.017 |
| KK (°) | 28.59 | 29.3 | 14.24 | 24.86 | 31.03 | 27.55 | 28.92 | 26.38 | 21.92 | 31.1 | 35.73 | 0.046 |
| LL (°) | 46.02 | 45.05 | 43.02 | 38.16 | 45.14 | 34.02 | 40.74 | 37.72 | 40.15 | 40.28 | 36.88 | 0.004 |
| PT (°) | 30.73 | 24.67 | 31.19 | 25.81 | 26.55 | 21.96 | 26.67 | 23.02 | 26.56 | 25.72 | 27.58 | 0.918 |
| TI (°) | 8.16 | 5.78 | 6.82 | 3.95 | 5.57 | 2.03 | 1.78 | 2.47 | 3.23 | 2.64 | 2.91 | 0.01 |
| LF (%) | 29.13 | 30 | 17.98 | 13.6 | 13.16 | 19.87 | 17.76 | 18.41 | 15.02 | 14.62 | 14.36 | 0.002 |
| RF (%) | 20.38 | 24.01 | 10.01 | 12.38 | 13.21 | 12.62 | 12.94 | 11.54 | 14.91 | 14.14 | 12.24 | 0.006 |
| LH (%) | 20.46 | 24.71 | 38.4 | 36.99 | 38.89 | 33.67 | 33.35 | 36.8 | 33.88 | 31.64 | 34.45 | 0.222 |
| RH (%) | 30.08 | 21.28 | 33.62 | 37.03 | 34.74 | 33.84 | 35.95 | 33.25 | 36.2 | 39.6 | 38.94 | 0.036 |
SP, CoP shifts; KK, angle of kyphosis; LL, angle of lordosis; TI, trunk inclination; PT, pelvic tilt; TSR, trunk surface rotation; LF and RF, left and right forefoot percentage load distribution; LH and RH, left and right hindfoot percentage load distribution.
Figure 2Spinal curvature in the coronal and sagittal plane in pre- (right) and posttreatment (left) examination based on the assessment using DIERS system.
Figure 3The results of gait analysis based on the pre- and posttreatment examination (respectively; on the right and left) using the DIERS pedoscan system. Green vertical lines indicate the normal values.