TY - JOUR
T1 - The effect of custom-made braces for the ankle and hindfoot on ankle and foot kinematics and ground reaction forces
AU - Kitaoka, Harold B.
AU - Crevoisier, Xavier M.
AU - Harbst, Kimberly
AU - Hansen, Diana
AU - Kotajarvi, Brian
AU - Kaufman, Kenton
PY - 2006/1/1
Y1 - 2006/1/1
N2 - Objective: To assess the effects on gait of custom-made polypropylene orthoses: ankle-foot orthosis (AFO), rigid hindfoot orthosis (HFO-R), and articulated hindfoot orthosis (HFO-A).Design: Experimental assessment. Setting: Institutional practice, motion analysis laboratory. Participants: Twenty asymptomatic normative subjects. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Three-dimensional kinematics, ground reaction force, and time-related factors in 4 conditions: shoe only, and shod with the AFO, HFO-R, and HFO-A. Results: The AFO and HFO-R limited sagittal and coronal plane ankle-hindfoot motion. The HFO-A limited hindfoot coronal motion while allowing normal sagittal motion. At the midfoot, the AFO and HFO-A limited transverse motion, but the HFO-A also limited sagittal and coronal motion. Use of the HFO-R resulted in exaggerated midfoot sagittal and coronal motion. Braces that limited motion to a greater degree were associated with more atypical kinetic variables, indicative of less dynamic gait. The HFO-A resulted in ground reaction forces most similar to unbraced conditions. Conclusions: Alteration in gait was affected by orthosis design. Orthoses with a rigid component crossing a joint restricted motion at that joint, but potentially compromised typical gait kinetic factors. For immobilizing the hindfoot, the HFO-A may be more comfortable and still provide more stability than the HFO-R or AFO.
AB - Objective: To assess the effects on gait of custom-made polypropylene orthoses: ankle-foot orthosis (AFO), rigid hindfoot orthosis (HFO-R), and articulated hindfoot orthosis (HFO-A).Design: Experimental assessment. Setting: Institutional practice, motion analysis laboratory. Participants: Twenty asymptomatic normative subjects. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: Three-dimensional kinematics, ground reaction force, and time-related factors in 4 conditions: shoe only, and shod with the AFO, HFO-R, and HFO-A. Results: The AFO and HFO-R limited sagittal and coronal plane ankle-hindfoot motion. The HFO-A limited hindfoot coronal motion while allowing normal sagittal motion. At the midfoot, the AFO and HFO-A limited transverse motion, but the HFO-A also limited sagittal and coronal motion. Use of the HFO-R resulted in exaggerated midfoot sagittal and coronal motion. Braces that limited motion to a greater degree were associated with more atypical kinetic variables, indicative of less dynamic gait. The HFO-A resulted in ground reaction forces most similar to unbraced conditions. Conclusions: Alteration in gait was affected by orthosis design. Orthoses with a rigid component crossing a joint restricted motion at that joint, but potentially compromised typical gait kinetic factors. For immobilizing the hindfoot, the HFO-A may be more comfortable and still provide more stability than the HFO-R or AFO.
KW - Ankle
KW - Biomechanics
KW - Foot
KW - Gait
KW - Orthotic devices
KW - Rehabilitation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=30144436793&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=30144436793&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.08.120
DO - 10.1016/j.apmr.2005.08.120
M3 - Article
C2 - 16401451
AN - SCOPUS:30144436793
SN - 0003-9993
VL - 87
SP - 130
EP - 135
JO - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
JF - Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
IS - 1
ER -