The influence of gait and speed on the dynamic navicular drop - A cross sectional study on healthy subjects.

INTRODUCTION: Variations of gait speed influence kinematic variables that may have an effect on dynamic foot deformation. The influence of gait speed on the navicular drop has not yet been investigated. METHODS: The navicular drop was evaluated in static and dynamic conditions using a 3D-motion capture system. The dynamic navicular drop was evaluated on a treadmill while walking and running at three different speeds. A repeated measures ANOVA and post-hoc tests were conducted to evaluate the differences in dynamic navicular drop, corresponding unloaded navicular height at foot strike and loaded navicular height during stance. RESULTS: Higher walking speed led to a significant decrease in navicular height at foot strike and a subsequent decrease of dynamic navicular drop (p=0.006). Across increasing running speeds, minimum navicular height was significantly decreased which in consequence led to an increased dynamic navicular drop (p=0.015). For walking and running at the same speed, there was a large effect of gait style with an increase of dynamic navicular drop by 3.5mm (p<0.001) during running. DISCUSSION: The change of gait from walking to running at the same speed had a large effect on dynamic navicular drop. The values of navicular height at foot strike and minimum navicular height during stance should be taken into account for the interpretation of dynamic navicular drop measures. Static and dynamic navicular drop measures differ substantially.

Effect of foot progression angle adjustment on the knee adduction moment and knee joint contact force in runners with and without knee osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Knee adduction moment (KAM) is often used as a surrogate marker of knee contact force (KCF) during walking. Previous studies have reported potential benefits to reduce KAM in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA) by foot progression angle adjustment. However, KAM is an external moment and it does not consider any muscle contribution to the joint loading, which should pose a greater influence in running than walking. RESEARCH QUESTION: This study used a computational model to compare KAM and KCF between runners with and without knee OA during running. In addition, we evaluated the KAM and KCF when runners adjusted to an out-toe running style. METHODS: Kinematic, kinetic, and lower limb EMG data were collected from 9 runners with knee OA and 10 healthy counterparts. They were asked to run at their usual speed with standard shoes on an instrumented treadmill. RESULTS: We found no significant difference in the KAM during running between OA and the healthy group (p > 0.376). However, runners with knee OA exhibited a greater total KCF than the healthy counterparts (p < 0.041). We did not observe any reduction in KAM after foot progression angle adjustment (p > 0.346). Surprisingly, an increase in the longitudinal KCF and total KCF were found with adjustment of foot progression angle (p < 0.046). SIGNIFICANCE: Unlike the findings reported by the previous walking trials, our findings do not support the notion that foot progression angle adjustment would lead to a lower joint loading during running.

Spinal Orthoses: The Crucial Role of Comfort on Compliance of Wearing - Monocentric Prospective Pilot Study of Randomized Cross-Over Design.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Various spine disorders are regularly treated by orthoses, and success of treatment depends on wearing these devices. In this study we examined the compliance, wear comfort, subjective stabilization and side effects associated with spinal orthoses using an individualized questionnaire and the Compact Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12). MATERIAL AND METHODS In this prospective pilot study of randomized cross-over design, twelve healthy volunteers with a mean age of 31.2 years wore three different types of orthoses, each for one week: A hyperextension brace (HB), a custom-made semirigid orthosis (SO) and a custom-made rigid orthosis (RO). The daily duration of wearing the orthosis was defined as primary endpoint; contentment was measured using an individualized questionnaire and the standardized SF-12. RESULTS In the study population calculated probability of wearing the HB and RO was between 0.2 und 38.5% (95% confidence interval). No volunteer wore the SO orthosis for the predefined time. The SO and RO each displayed high subjective stabilization, while the RO was more often associated with side effects like skin pressure marks than the SO. The need for rework due to discomfort was mainly necessary with the RO. We observed no substantial differences in feeling compression and sweating. Noteworthy, eight of 12 subjects complained of uncomfortable sternal pressure due to the upper pad of the HB. The SF-12: scores ranged from 52.1 to 48.6 on the physical (PCS), and from 53.7 to 50.8 on the mental component score (MCS), demonstrating an influence on QoL. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS The design as well as the orthosis itself influence the compliance of wearing and exert a moderate negative, but acceptable impact on QoL. The SO appeared to correlate with the best overall compromise between comfort and subjective stabilization. Further investigations are necessary in patients with spinal diseases, for whom the effect of orthosis wearing may surpass the potential discomfort. Key words: thoracolumbar spine, orthoses, SF-12 - Quality of Life - QoL, comfort, compliance.