Foot orthotic devices to modify selected aspects of lower extremity mechanics

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 338-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
B.T. Bates ◽  
L.R. Osternig ◽  
B. Mason ◽  
L.S. James
2006 ◽  
Vol 96 (5) ◽  
pp. 408-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter L. Jenkins ◽  
Susanne G. Raedeke

One hundred thirty-two female basketball players were observed for lower-extremity overuse injury between 1993 and 2004. Athletes studied between 1993 and 1996 did not receive foot orthotic devices and composed the control group. The treatment group comprised athletes studied between 1996 and 2004. Athletes in the treatment group were given a foot orthotic device before participation in basketball. Data analysis included lower-extremity overuse injury rates and the effect of foot orthotic devices on lower-extremity overuse injury rates by means of an incidence density ratio. The control group had a lower-extremity overuse injury rate of 5.37 per 1,000 exposures, and the treatment group had a rate of 6.44 per 1,000 exposures. The incidence density ratio was not significant (P = .44). This study rejects the concept that foot orthotic devices may assist in prevention of lower-extremity overuse injury in female basketball players. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 96(5): 408–412, 2006)


2006 ◽  
Vol 38 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. S123
Author(s):  
Ashley S. Baker ◽  
Jack E. Taunton ◽  
Don C. McKenzie ◽  
Richard Beauchamp

2008 ◽  
Vol 98 (5) ◽  
pp. 394-403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene S. Davis ◽  
Rebecca Avrin Zifchock ◽  
Alison T. DeLeo

Background: Motion control and comfort are primary objectives in orthotic intervention. Semicustom orthotic devices have been presented as a more cost-effective solution than custom orthotic devices. However, no studies have compared their function or comfort to that of custom orthotic devices. Methods: Nineteen uninjured runners were fitted for custom and semicustom orthotic devices. Subjects underwent an instrumented gait analysis of running and walking in no-orthotic, custom orthotic, and semicustom orthotic conditions. Subjects completed visual analog scales for the custom and semicustom orthotic conditions. One-way repeated measures analyses of variance were performed on the rearfoot variables of peak eversion, eversion excursion, eversion duration, and eversion velocity. Two-tailed, dependent t tests were used to compare comfort. Results: Eversion excursion showed significant differences between the conditions: during running, it was reduced in the custom orthotic as compared to the no-orthotic condition; during walking, it was reduced in the semicustom orthotic as compared to both the custom and no-orthotic conditions. The custom orthotic devices were significantly more comfortable (P < .05) than the semicustom devices in the area of the edges only. Conclusion: The results suggest that, in uninjured individuals, there are few differences in rearfoot motion control and comfort between the custom and semicustom orthotic devices used in this study. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 98(5): 394–403, 2008)


2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 107-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Butler ◽  
Joaquin A. Barrios ◽  
Todd Royer ◽  
Irene S. Davis

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of laterally wedged foot orthotic devices, used to treat knee osteoarthritis, on frontal plane mechanics at the rearfoot and hip during walking. Thirty individuals with diagnosed medial knee osteoarthritis were recruited for this study. Three dimensional kinematics and kinetics were recorded as the subjects walked in the laboratory at an intentional walking speed. Peak eversion, eversion excursion and peak eversion moment were increased while the peak knee adduction moment was reduced in the laterally wedged orthotic condition compared to the no wedge condition. In contrast, no changes were observed in the variables of interest at the hip. There was no significant relationship between the change in the peak frontal plane moment at the rearfoot and change in the peak frontal plane moment at the knee or hip as a result of the lateral wedge. Laterally wedged foot orthotic devices, used to treat knee osteoarthritis, do not influence hip mechanics. However, they do result in increased rearfoot eversion and inversion moment. Therefore, a full medical screen of the foot should occur before laterally wedged foot orthotic devices are prescribed as a treatment for knee osteoarthritis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document