Effect of 3D printed foot orthoses stiffness and design on foot kinematics and plantar pressures in healthy people

Desmyttere, Gauthier; Leteneur, Sébastien; Hajizadeh, Maryam; Bleau, Jacinte; Begon, Mickaël

doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2020.07.146

Cited by 23 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…57,58 Furthermore, stiffness is closely related to the plantar pressure distribution and even affects the kinematics, adjusting the stiffness of the orthopedic insoles provides control over hind foot motion, particularly valgus and abduction, which are key variables contributing to flatfoot. 59 However, optimal stiffness is determined by the pressure the insole is expected to withstand, which is determined by the weight of the patient and the activity being engaged in, individuals with relatively high BM or BMI may need stiff insole materials to minimize plantar pressure. 60 Consequently, optimal parameters carefully adopted based on personal characteristics, such as BMI and BM, arch anatomy, or arch index.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Photocurable and elastic polyurethane based on polyether glycol with adjustable hardness for 3D printing customized flatfoot orthosis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Photocurable and elastic polyurethane based on polyether glycol with adjustable hardness for 3D printing customized flatfoot orthosis

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…biorbd was used in most of the project of the Laboratoire de Simulation et Modélisation du Mouvement (S2M); particularly in analysis settings (Desmyttere et al, 2020;Jackson et al, 2012;Verdugo et al, 2020) and simulation settings (Bélaise et al, 2018;Moissenet et al, 2019) for a wide variety of movements (walking, piano playing, upper limb maximal exertions, etc.) More recently, an optimal control framework for biomechanics (bioptim, based on Ipopt (Wächter & Biegler, 2006) and ACADOS (Verschueren et al, 2019) was developed around biorbd.…”

Section: Previous Usage Of Biorbdmentioning

confidence: 99%

biorbd: A C++, Python and MATLAB library to analyze and simulate the human body biomechanics

Michaud¹,

Begon²

2021

JOSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomechanics is at the interface of several fields of science, such as mechanics, human physiology and robotics. Although this transdisciplinarity encourages the emergence of new ideas, the variety of data to analyze simultaneously can be overwhelming. Commonly biomechanical datasets are composed of skin markers trajectories (termed as markers), contact forces, electromyography (EMG) signal, inertial measurement units (IMU) kinematics, etc., which by nature are not straightforward to combine. It is at their meeting point-the body movementthat biorbd steps in; bio standing for biomechanics and rbd for rigid body dynamics. biorbd is a feature-based development library that targets the manipulation of biomechanical data in a comprehensive and accessible manner. For a given musculoskeletal model, it provides functions for inverse flow-i.e.

show abstract

“…Even though there are discrepancies between the conclusions of different studies regarding the biomechanical effects of FOs during locomotion [11][12][13], it has been hypothesised that they could provide their clinical benefits through their kinetic effects, according to the tissue stress model [15]. FOs modify plantar pressure [16,17], normalise centre of pressure trajectory [18] as well as modify joint moments [17,18]. However, most studies that investigated the effects of FOs on lower limb biomechanics have used generic devices with little customisation to individuals' morphological and biomechanical particularities [11,12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, there is a lack of accurate understanding of the interactions between the mechanical properties of FOs and the underlying treatment mechanism. Recent work suggests that increasing FOs stiffness potentiates their kinematic and kinetic effects during gait, especially by further reducing rearfoot eversion angles [16] and further increasing midfoot plantar pressure [18] compared to more compliant FOs. This demonstrates that FOs stiffness is an essential parameter to modify foot biomechanics, which should be optimally set for each individual.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thick shells and medially wedged posts increase foot orthoses medial longitudinal arch stiffness: an experimental study

Pelaez

Farahpour

Griffiths

et al. 2023

Journal of Foot and Ankle Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Foot orthoses (FOs) are commonly prescribed devices to attenuate biomechanical deficits and improve physical function in patients with musculoskeletal disorders. It is postulated that FOs provide their effects through the production of reaction forces at the foot-FOs interface. An important parameter to provide these reaction forces is their medial arch stiffness. Preliminary results suggest that adding extrinsic additions to FOs (e.g., rearfoot posts) increases their medial arch stiffness. A better understanding of how FOs medial arch stiffness can be modulated by changing structural factors is necessary to better customise FOs for patients. The objectives of this study were to compare FOs stiffness and force required to lower the FOs medial arch in three thicknesses and two models (with and without medially wedged forefoot-rearfoot posts). Methods Two models of FOs, 3D printed in Polynylon-11, were used: (1) without extrinsic additions (mFO), and (2) with forefoot-rearfoot posts and a 6o medial wedge (FO6MW). For each model, three thicknesses (2.6 mm, 3.0 mm, and 3.4 mm) were manufactured. FOs were fixed to a compression plate and vertically loaded over the medial arch at a rate of 10 mm/minute. Two-way ANOVAs and Tukey post-hoc tests with Bonferroni corrections were used to compare medial arch stiffness and force required to lower the arch across conditions. Results Regardless of the differing shell thicknesses, the overall stiffness was 3.4 times greater for FO6MW compared to mFO (p < 0.001). FOs with 3.4 mm and 3.0 mm thicknesses displayed 1.3- and 1.1- times greater stiffness than FOs with a thickness of 2.6 mm. FOs with a thickness of 3.4 mm also exhibited 1.1 times greater stiffness than FOs with a thickness of 3.0 mm. Overall, the force to lower the medial arch was up to 3.3 times greater for FO6MW than mFO and thicker FOs required greater force (p < 0.001). Conclusions An increased medial longitudinal arch stiffness is seen in FOs following the addition of 6o medially inclined forefoot-rearfoot posts, and when the shell is thicker. Overall, adding forefoot-rearfoot posts to FOs is significantly more efficient than increasing shell thickness to enhance these variables should that be the therapeutic aim.

show abstract

Effect of 3D printed foot orthoses stiffness and design on foot kinematics and plantar pressures in healthy people

Cited by 23 publications

References 28 publications

Photocurable and elastic polyurethane based on polyether glycol with adjustable hardness for 3D printing customized flatfoot orthosis

Photocurable and elastic polyurethane based on polyether glycol with adjustable hardness for 3D printing customized flatfoot orthosis

biorbd: A C++, Python and MATLAB library to analyze and simulate the human body biomechanics

Thick shells and medially wedged posts increase foot orthoses medial longitudinal arch stiffness: an experimental study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About