Impact of different foot orthoses on gait biomechanics in individuals with chronic metatarsalgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Foot orthoses (FOs) are commonly prescribed to reduce pain and improve function in individuals with musculoskeletal disorders, including those with chronic metatarsalgia (CM). Reducing the mechanical overload under the metatarsal heads during locomotion is the central point of the treatment for CM. Medially wedged FOs (MWFOs) with a metatarsal pad could further reduce pressure loading under the metatarsal heads and modify foot and ankle biomechanics compared to standard FOs (SFOs). RESEARCH QUESTION: Do MWFOs further decrease the peak plantar pressure under the metatarsal heads in individuals with CM compared to SFOs? What are the effects of these FOs on foot and ankle 3D kinematics and kinetics in individuals with CM? METHODS: Twenty-three individuals (17 females and 6 males) with CM were recruited in this cross-sectional descriptive study. Participants walked during three conditions: (1) Shod, (2) SFOs, and (3) MWFOs. Peak plantar pressure, midfoot and ankle angles and moments were calculated and compared across conditions with repeated measure ANOVAs using statistical parametric mapping. RESULTS: SFOs and MWFOs reduced plantar pressure under the metatarsal heads, ankle plantarflexion angle, and midfoot plantarflexion moment compared to shod. SFOs and MWFOs increased plantar pressure under the medial midfoot. MWFOs reduced plantar pressure under the 1st-2nd-3rd metatarsal heads during the second part of the stance phase and increased plantar pressure under the medial midfoot compared to SFOs. MWFOs also decreased midfoot dorsiflexion and inversion angles, ankle eversion angle, and ankle inversion moment compared to shod. SIGNIFICANCE: MWFOs were more effective than SFOs in reducing peak pressure under the 1st-2nd-3rd metatarsal heads and modifying lower limb biomechanics during walking. This reduction implies a pressure transfer from the metatarsal heads to the medial midfoot. These findings are promising to find the FOs model most suitable to reduce pain and improve physical function in individuals with CM.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".