FACTORS AFFECTING INSOLE USAGE IN PATIENTS WITH PES PLANUS

Murat EREM, Tahsin Acikgoz, Nurettin Tastekin, Necdet Sut

Abstract


Introduction: Insoles and exercise programs are the main treatment methods for pes planus patients. Insole using may prevent the formation of pain in daily activities as well as increasing the quality of walking. The aim of this study was to investigate insole usage time and the factors affecting this situation in patient with pes planus. Materials and Methods: 136 patients with pes planus who were prescribed an insole, included in the study. We invited patients to participate in a telephone survey. Patients´ demographics, insole usage time, reasons to quit and the quitting time were questioned. Insole usage rates and the demographic data of patients were compared. Results: Of the 136 patients included in the present study, 80 were women (59%) and 56 were male (31%). 86 of these patients used an insole six months and over, 15 of them used shorter than six months and 35 of them bought the insoles but they didn't use it (63%, 11% and 26% respectively ). The average age of patients who used insoles was 32.80±18.14 and who did not use insoles was 40.77±12.54 (p=0.04). 33.8 percent of women and 14.3 percent of men did not use insoles. This difference is statistically significant (p=0.04). We did not find any significant relationship between height, weight, body mass index values and usage of insoles (p>0:05). Conclusion: The use of insoles in treating patients with pes planus is widely accepted and may be affected by the demographics such as gender and age. Besides wearing comfort, female sex and older age should be considered that may affect the use of insoles.


Keywords


Pes Planus, insole, orthosis

Full Text:

PDF

References


Richie DH Jr. Biomechanics and clinical analysis of the adult acquired flatfoot. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2007;24(4):617-44.

Luhmann SJ, Rich MM, Schoenecker PL. Painful idiopathic rigid flatfoot in children and adolescents. Foot Ankle Int. 2000;21(1):59-66.

Walters JL, Mendicino SS. The flexible adult flatfoot: anatomy and pathomechanics. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2014;31(3):329-36.

Kosashvili Y, Fridman T, Backstein D, Safir O, Ziv YB. The correlation between pes planus and anterior knee or intermittent low back pain. Foot Ankle Int. 2008;29(9):910-3.

Lee MS, Vanore JV, Thomas JL, Catanzariti AR, Kogler G, Kravitz SR, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of adult flatfoot. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2005;44(2):78-113.

Bowring B, Chockalingam N. Conservative treatment of tibialis posterior tendon dysfunction—A review. Foot. 2010;20(1):18-26.

Marzano R. Nonoperative management of adult flatfoot deformities. Clin Podiat Med Surg. 2014;31(3):337-47.

Parsons S, Naim S, Richards P, McBride D. Correction and prevention of deformity in type II tibialis posterior dysfunction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468(4):1025-32.

Vicenzino B. Foot orthotics in the treatment of lower limb conditions: a musculoskeletal physiotherapy perspective. Man Ther. 2004;9(4):185-96.

Crabtree P, Dhokia V, Newman S, Ansell M. Manufacturing methodology for personalised symptom-specific sports insoles. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. 2009;25(6):972-9.

Tong J, Ng EY. Preliminary investigation on the reduction of plantar loading pressure with different insole materials (SRP--Slow Recovery Poron, P--Poron, PPF--Poron+ Plastazote, firm and PPS--Poron+ Plastazote, soft). Foot (Edinburgh, Scotland). 2010;20(1):1-6.

McPoil TG Jr. Footwear. Phys Ther. 1988;68(12):1857-65.

van Netten JJ, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JH, Postema K. What influences a patient’s decision to use custom-made orthopaedic shoes? BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012;13:.92.

Jannink MJ, Van Dijk H, De Vries J, Groothoff JW, Lankhorst GJ. A systematic review of the methodological quality and extent to which evaluation studies measure the usability of orthopaedic shoes. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18(1):15-26.

Swinnen E, Kerckhofs E. Compliance of patients wearing an orthotic device or orthopedic shoes: A systematic review. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2015;19(4):759-70.

Wielandt T, Mckenna K, Tooth L, Strong J. Factors that predict the post-discharge use of recommended assistive technology (AT). Disabil Rehabil: Assist Technol. 2006;1(1-2):29-40.

Wessels R, Dijcks B, Soede M, Gelderblom G, De Witte L. Non-use of provided assistive technology devices, a literature overview. Technology and disability. 2003;15(4):231-8.

Waaijman R, Keukenkamp R, de Haart M, Polomski WP, Nollet F, Bus SA. Adherence to wearing prescription custom-made footwear in patients with diabetes at high risk for plantar foot ulceration. Diabetes care. 2013;36(6):1613-8.

Haworth R, Hopkins J. Use of aids following total hip replacement. The British Journal of Occupational Therapy. 1980;43(12):398-400.

Geiger CM. The utilization of assistive devices by patients discharged from an acute rehabilitation setting. Physical & occupational therapy in geriatrics. 1990;9(1):3-25.

Haworth R. Use of aids during the first three months after total hip replacement. Rheumatology. 1983;22(1):29-35.

Shipham I. Bath aids-their use by a multi-diagnostic group of patients. Int Rehabil Med. 1986;8(4):182-4.

Johnson M, Newton P, Goyder E. Patient and professional perspectives on prescribed therapeutic footwear for people with diabetes: a vignette study. Patient Educ Couns. 2006;64(1):167-72.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24125/sanamed.v13i2.240

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2018 Murat EREM, Tahsin Acikgoz, Nurettin Tastekin, Necdet Sut

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.