-
Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics Jan 2019Adult-acquired flatfoot deformity (AAFD) comprises a wide spectrum of ligament and tendon failure that may result in significant deformity and disability. It is often... (Review)
Review
Adult-acquired flatfoot deformity (AAFD) comprises a wide spectrum of ligament and tendon failure that may result in significant deformity and disability. It is often associated with posterior tibial tendon deficiency (PTTD), which has been linked to multiple demographic factors, medical comorbidities, and genetic processes. AAFD is classified using stages I through IV. Nonoperative treatment modalities should always be attempted first and often provide resolution in stages I and II. Stage II, consisting of a wide range of flexible deformities, is typically treated operatively with a combination of soft tissue procedures and osteotomies. Stage III, which is characterized by a rigid flatfoot, typically warrants triple arthrodesis. Stage IV, where the flatfoot deformity involves the ankle joint, is treated with ankle arthrodesis or ankle arthroplasty with or without deltoid ligament reconstruction along with procedures to restore alignment of the foot. There is limited evidence as to the optimal procedure; thus, the surgical indications and techniques continue to be researched.
PubMed: 35097314
DOI: 10.1177/2473011418820847 -
Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery &... Feb 2015Adult flatfoot is defined as a flattening of the medial arch of the foot in weight-bearing and lack of a propulsive gait. The 3 lesion levels are the talonavicular,... (Review)
Review
Adult flatfoot is defined as a flattening of the medial arch of the foot in weight-bearing and lack of a propulsive gait. The 3 lesion levels are the talonavicular, tibiotarsal and midfoot joints. The subtalar joint is damaged by the consequent rotational defects. Clinical examination determines deformity and reducibility, and assesses any posterior tibialis muscle deficit, the posterior tibialis tendon and spring ligament being frequently subject to degenerative lesions. Radiographic examination in 3 incidences in weight-bearing is essential, to determine the principal level of deformity. Tendon (posterior tibialis tendon) and ligamentous lesions (spring ligament and interosseous ligament) are analyzed on MRI or ultrasound. In fixed deformities, CT explores for arthritic evolution or specific etiologies. 3D CT reconstruction can analyze bone and joint morphology and contribute to the planning of any osteotomy. Medical management associates insoles and physiotherapy. Acute painful flatfoot requires strict cast immobilization. Surgical treatment associates numerous combinations of procedures, currently under assessment for supple flatfoot: for the hindfoot: medial slide calcaneal osteotomy, calcaneal lengthening osteotomy, or arthroereisis; for the midfoot: arthrodesis on one or several rays, or first cuneiform or first metatarsal osteotomy; for the ankle: medial collateral ligament repair with tendon transfer. Fixed deformities require arthrodesis of one or several joint-lines in the hindfoot; for the ankle, total replacement after realignment of the foot, or tibiotalocalcaneal fusion or ankle and hindfoot fusion; and, for the midfoot, cuneonavicular or cuneometatarsal fusion. Tendinous procedures are often associated. Specific etiologies may need individualized procedures. In conclusion, adult flatfoot tends to be diagnosed and managed too late, with consequent impact on the ankle, the management of which is complex and poorly codified.
Topics: Adult; Diagnostic Imaging; Flatfoot; Foot Joints; Humans; Orthopedic Procedures; Orthotic Devices; Osteoarthritis; Physical Examination; Shoes
PubMed: 25595429
DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2014.07.030 -
Australian Journal of General Practice May 2020Flat foot (pes planus) describes a reduction or absence of the medial longitudinal arch (MLA) of the foot, with or without additional deformities of the foot and ankle....
BACKGROUND
Flat foot (pes planus) describes a reduction or absence of the medial longitudinal arch (MLA) of the foot, with or without additional deformities of the foot and ankle. Flat feet are relatively common in childhood, affecting up to 14% of children. Flexible flat feet can be part of a normal developmental profile, and foot arches usually develop with age, although there is a wide range of normal variation. Up to 25% of the total population has a deficient MLA in at least one foot; therefore, it is likely a general practitioner (GP) will encounter this issue relatively frequently in their practice.
OBJECTIVE
This article outlines a method for paediatric pes planus assessment and management. A multidisciplinary approach involving GPs, rehabilitation physicians, orthopaedic surgeons, physiotherapists, orthotists and podiatrists is discussed.
DISCUSSION
Paediatric pes planus treatment has long been a contentious topic, with a lack of clarity in the literature regarding which children require treatment and the efficacy of intervention. However, there is increasing evidence that non-surgical interventions, such as orthoses and physiotherapy, may be beneficial for certain groups of children.
Topics: Disease Management; Flatfoot; Foot Orthoses; Humans; Pediatrics; Physical Therapy Modalities
PubMed: 32416653
DOI: 10.31128/AJGP-09-19-5089 -
Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery &... Feb 2020Congenital pathologies of the forefoot encompass two broad entities with vastly different treatments and prognosis: malformations, which occur during the embryonic... (Review)
Review
Congenital pathologies of the forefoot encompass two broad entities with vastly different treatments and prognosis: malformations, which occur during the embryonic period and cause anatomical defects, and deformations, which occur during the fetal period on a foot that is configured normally. These deformities are more easily cured when they occur later during the fetal period. When the anomaly is bilateral, a genetic origin must be considered. There are two main entities under the term "deformity": metatarsus adductus and skewfoot (aka "Z"-foot or serpentine foot). Within malformations are brachydactyly (transverse defects), longitudinal defects, syndactyly, polydactyly, clinodactyly and macrodactyly. Among other forefoot abnormalities are hallux valgus, which rarely presents in congenital form, and for which conservative treatment is sometimes sufficient. Also in this group are sequelae of amniotic band constriction, forefoot anomalies secondary to the treatment of congenital pathologies (talipes equinovarus and congenital vertical talus) and nail-related pathologies (ingrown toe nail and incorrect nail position).
Topics: Child; Foot Deformities, Congenital; Global Health; Humans; Incidence; Metatarsal Bones; Radiography
PubMed: 31648997
DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2019.03.021 -
American Family Physician May 2022Tendinopathies of the foot and ankle, including posterior tibial, peroneal, and tibialis anterior, are commonly overlooked by primary care physicians. The posterior...
Tendinopathies of the foot and ankle, including posterior tibial, peroneal, and tibialis anterior, are commonly overlooked by primary care physicians. The posterior tibial tendon is the main dynamic stabilizing muscle of the medial longitudinal arch. Patients who have posterior tibial tendinopathy present with medial ankle pain, pes planovalgus deformity, and a positive too many toes sign. Nonoperative treatment options include support for the medial longitudinal arch and physical therapy focusing on eccentric exercises. Surgical treatment is considered for patients who do not respond to nonoperative treatments after three to six months and is based on the specific stage of tendinopathy. Peroneal tendon disorders are commonly mistaken for or occur concomitantly with lateral ankle sprains. Varus hindfoot is a known risk factor for peroneal tendinopathy. Treatments include immobilization, laterally posted orthotics, and physical therapy for progressive tendon loading. Tibialis anterior tendinopathy presents as anterior ankle and medial midfoot pain and can be diagnosed with a positive tibialis anterior passive stretch test. Initial treatment includes immobilization followed by physical therapy. Surgical debridement can be considered if nonoperative treatment is ineffective.
Topics: Ankle; Ankle Joint; Flatfoot; Humans; Pain; Tendinopathy
PubMed: 35559641
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research Nov 2021Flatfoot is characterised by the falling of the medial longitudinal arch, eversion of the hindfoot and abduction of the loaded forefoot. Furthermore, flatfoot leads to a... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Flatfoot is characterised by the falling of the medial longitudinal arch, eversion of the hindfoot and abduction of the loaded forefoot. Furthermore, flatfoot leads to a variety of musculoskeletal symptoms in the lower extremity, such as knee or hip pain. The standard conservative treatment for flatfoot deformity is exercise therapy or treatment with foot orthoses. Foot orthoses are prescribed for various foot complaints. However, the evidence for the provision of foot orthoses is inconsistent. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence of foot orthoses for adults with flatfoot.
METHODS
A computerized search was conducted in August 2021, using the databases PubMed, Scopus, Pedro, Cochrane Library, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Intervention studies of any design investigating the effects of foot orthoses were included, apart from case studies. Two independent reviewers assessed all search results to identify eligible studies and to assess their methodological quality.
RESULTS
A total of 110 studies were identified through the database search. 12 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. These studies investigated prefabricated and custom-made foot orthoses, evaluating stance and plantar pressure during gait. The sample sizes of the identified studies ranged from 8 to 80. In most of the studies, the methodological quality was low and a lack of information was frequently detected.
CONCLUSION
There is a lack of evidence on the effect of foot orthoses for flatfoot in adults. This review illustrates the importance of conducting randomized controlled trials and the comprehensive development of guidelines for the prescription of foot orthoses. Given the weak evidence available, the common prescription of foot orthoses is somewhat surprising.
Topics: Adult; Flatfoot; Foot; Foot Orthoses; Gait; Humans; Lower Extremity
PubMed: 34844639
DOI: 10.1186/s13047-021-00499-z -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2022Paediatric flat feet are a common presentation in primary care; reported prevalence approximates 15%. A minority of flat feet can hurt and limit gait. There is no... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Paediatric flat feet are a common presentation in primary care; reported prevalence approximates 15%. A minority of flat feet can hurt and limit gait. There is no optimal strategy, nor consensus, for using foot orthoses (FOs) to treat paediatric flat feet.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of foot orthoses for treating paediatric flat feet.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase to 01 September 2021, and two clinical trials registers on 07 August 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We identified all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of FOs as an intervention for paediatric flat feet. The outcomes included in this review were pain, function, quality of life, treatment success, and adverse events. Intended comparisons were: any FOs versus sham, any FOs versus shoes, customised FOs (CFOs) versus prefabricated FOs (PFOs).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed standard methods recommended by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 16 trials with 1058 children, aged 11 months to 19 years, with flexible flat feet. Distinct flat foot presentations included asymptomatic, juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA), symptomatic and developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD). The trial interventions were FOs, footwear, foot and rehabilitative exercises, and neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES). Due to heterogeneity, we did not pool the data. Most trials had potential for selection, performance, detection, and selective reporting bias. No trial blinded participants. We present the results separately for asymptomatic (healthy children) and symptomatic (children with JIA) flat feet. The certainty of evidence was very low to low, downgraded for bias, imprecision, and indirectness. Three comparisons were evaluated across trials: CFO versus shoes; PFO versus shoes; CFO versus PFO. Asymptomatic flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low-quality evidence showed that CFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point visual analogue scale (VAS)) at one year (risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 1.07); absolute decrease (11.8%, 95% CI 4.7% fewer to 15.8% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.19); absolute effect (3.4% more, 95% CI 4.1% fewer to 13.1% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 106 participants): low to very-low quality evidence showed that PFOs result in little or no difference in the proportion without pain (10-point VAS) at one year (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.16); absolute effect (4.7% fewer, 95% CI 18.9% fewer to 12.6% more); or on withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.23). 3. CFOs versus PFOs (1 trial, 108 participants): low-quality evidence found no difference in the proportion without pain at one year (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.18); absolute effect (7.4% fewer, 95% CI 22.2% fewer to 11.1% more); or on withdrawal due to adverse events (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.12). Function and quality of life (QoL) were not assessed. Symptomatic (JIA) flat feet 1. CFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 28 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 no pain) between groups (MD -1.5, 95% CI -2.78 to -0.22). Low-quality evidence showed improvements in function with CFOs (Foot Function Index - FFI disability, 0 to 100, 0 best function; MD -18.55, 95% CI -34.42 to -2.68), child-rated QoL (PedsQL, 0 to 100, 100 best quality; MD 12.1, 95% CI -1.6 to 25.8) and parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 9, 95% CI -4.1 to 22.1) and little or no difference between groups in treatment success (timed walking; MD -1.33 seconds, 95% CI -2.77 to 0.11), or withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.94); absolute difference (9.7% fewer, 20.5 % fewer to 44.8% more). 2. PFOs versus shoes (1 trial, 25 participants, 3-month follow-up): very low-quality evidence showed little or no difference in pain between groups (MD 0.02, 95% CI -1.94 to 1.98). Low-quality evidence showed no difference between groups in function (FFI-disability MD -4.17, 95% CI -24.4 to 16.06), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -3.84, 95% CI -19 to 11.33), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD -0.64, 95% CI -13.22 to 11.94). 3. CFOs versus PFOs (2 trials, 87 participants): low-quality evidence showed little or no difference between groups in pain (0 to 10 scale, 0 no pain) at 3 months (MD -1.48, 95% CI -3.23 to 0.26), function (FFI-disability MD -7.28, 95% CI -15.47 to 0.92), child-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 8.6, 95% CI -3.9 to 21.2), or parent-rated QoL (PedsQL MD 2.9, 95% CI -11 to 16.8).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low to very low-certainty evidence shows that the effect of CFOs (high cost) or PFOs (low cost) versus shoes, and CFOs versus PFOs on pain, function and HRQoL is uncertain. This is pertinent for clinical practice, given the economic disparity between CFOs and PFOs. FOs may improve pain and function, versus shoes in children with JIA, with minimal delineation between costly CFOs and generic PFOs. This review updates that from 2010, confirming that in the absence of pain, the use of high-cost CFOs for healthy children with flexible flat feet has no supporting evidence, and draws very limited conclusions about FOs for treating paediatric flat feet. The availability of normative and prospective foot development data, dismisses most flat foot concerns, and negates continued attention to this topic. Attention should be re-directed to relevant paediatric foot conditions, which cause pain, limit function, or reduce quality of life. The agenda for researching asymptomatic flat feet in healthy children must be relegated to history, and replaced by a targeted research rationale, addressing children with indisputable foot pathology from discrete diagnoses, namely JIA, cerebral palsy, congenital talipes equino varus, trisomy 21 and Charcot Marie Tooth. Whether research resources should continue to be wasted on studying flat feet in healthy children that do not hurt, is questionable. Future updates of this review will address only relevant paediatric foot conditions.
Topics: Child; Flatfoot; Foot Orthoses; Humans; Pain; Pain Measurement; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35080267
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006311.pub4 -
Journal of Orthopaedic Science :... Jan 2019We describe the pathology and treatment of flexible flat foot in children. The flexible flat foot is seen in the overly flexible foot and usually involves hypermobility...
We describe the pathology and treatment of flexible flat foot in children. The flexible flat foot is seen in the overly flexible foot and usually involves hypermobility of the subtalar joint. It typically occurs in childhood and may continue to adulthood. The arch develops spontaneously during the first decade of life in most children and comes within the normal range observed in adult feet. We prescribed orthoses for the treatment of flexible flat foot patients. Lateral weight-bearing radiographs and ultrasonography were helpful for the evaluation of the flat foot. Bleck recommended the UCBL shoe insert in cases of flexible flat foot if the standing or lateral rentgenogram demonstrates a talar plantar flexion angle (TPF) of 45° or greater. Bordelon suggested that cases of flexible flat foot should be treated if the standing or lateral roentgenogram demonstrates a Meary's talo-1st metatarsal angle (T1-MTA) of -15°or greater. However, the radiograph of a young child's foot poses some difficulties in making an accurate evaluation, because of the radiolucent cartilage zone. In this situation, a sagittal image obtained by ultrasonography has proved to be a powerful aid to evaluate the type of the flat foot. We classified the flat foot into three types: talo-navicular sag (T-N sag), naviculo-cuneiform sag (NC sag) and talo-navicular and naviculo-cuneiform sag (Mixed sag) following the criteria of Tachdjian. We recommended the NC sag and Mixed sag groups to be treated by using orthoses, while we kept a status of watchful waiting for the T-N sag group. However, we should consider the increasing complaints of children and their parents during the orthotic treatment. A through discussion between the parents of patients and the pediatric orthopedic doctors is necessary before orthotic treatment is started.
Topics: Child; Disease Management; Flatfoot; Humans; Orthotic Devices; Radiography; Tarsal Bones; Weight-Bearing
PubMed: 30366675
DOI: 10.1016/j.jos.2018.09.018 -
Journal of Physiotherapy Jan 2023In people with flexible flat foot, what is the effect of a comprehensive exercise program on navicular drop height and medial longitudinal arch angle compared with a... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
QUESTION
In people with flexible flat foot, what is the effect of a comprehensive exercise program on navicular drop height and medial longitudinal arch angle compared with a control regimen of brief active range of motion exercises?
DESIGN
Randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, blinding of assessors and intention-to-treat analysis.
PARTICIPANTS
Fifty-two people with flexible flat foot.
INTERVENTION
The experimental group undertook 30-minute exercise sessions three times per week for 6 weeks. The exercises involved active dorsiflexion and plantarflexion, foot shortening exercises, gluteal muscle strengthening, and stretching. The control group performed active dorsiflexion and plantarflexion only for 6 weeks.
OUTCOME MEASURES
Navicular drop height and longitudinal arch angle.
RESULTS
Randomisation allocated 26 participants to each group. One participant from the experimental group and two from the control group did not complete the study. After 6 weeks, the participants in the experimental group improved their navicular drop height by 0.4 cm (95% CI 0.4 to 0.5) more than those in the control group. These participants also improved their longitudinal arch angle by 16 deg (95% CI 13 to 19) more than those in the control group.
CONCLUSION
In people with flexible flat foot, a comprehensive 6-week exercise program improved the navicular drop height and longitudinal arch angle more than active dorsiflexion and plantarflexion alone. This improved the cosmetic appearance of the foot and reduced progression towards more severe flat foot, which typically becomes symptomatic.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
CTRI/2021/07/034599.
Topics: Humans; Flatfoot; Foot; Exercise Therapy; Muscle, Skeletal
PubMed: 36526555
DOI: 10.1016/j.jphys.2022.11.011