Use and Effectiveness of Orthotics in Hyperpronated Dancers

Abstract

Hyperpronation is a common foot problem in dancers. The aim of this study was to investigate the usage and effectiveness of orthotics in the management of symptomatic hyperpronation among dancers. A prospective cohort study of all dancer-patients in the investigators' practice who were prescribed orthotics for new symptoms related to hyperpronation between July 2008 and January 2009 was conducted. In this group, the longitudinal medial arch angle of the foot was measured by the foot build registration system (FBRS), both barefoot and while wearing the orthotics. In addition, patients filled out questionnaires addressing perceived effectiveness of the orthotics for pain reduction and dance ability, among other items. A second retrospective study was conducted in order to obtain longitudinal data regarding dancers' compliance with, and subjective evaluation of, wearing orthotics over the preceding 6 years. Among participating dancers who met criteria for the prospective (N = 24) or retrospective (N = 81) aspects of the study (total N = 105), 67% wore orthotics at the time of follow-up. The average compliance in usage was 6.0 (± 1.5 ) days per week and 7.5 (± 3) hours per day. The average rate of satisfaction was 67.9 (± 26.5), average degree of relief in symptoms was 58.3 (± 28.3), and self-reported degree of improvement in dance ability was 45.7 (± 27.9) on a 100 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). There was a significant decrease in pain from the day of orthotics prescription to follow-up (25.9%, or 18.9 mm decrease on the VAS, CI 6.6-30.9, p = 0.005) in the prospective group (N = 24). Orthotics were found to decrease the medial longitudinal arch angle significantly during static stance with the orthotic in place (CI 0.08-1.65, p = 0.03). It is concluded that the dancers in this study demonstrated a high rate of compliance in obtaining and wearing their orthotics and experienced a significant decrease in pain.

A systematic review of questionnaires to assess patient satisfaction with limb orthoses

“…Functional characteristics of an orthosis are closely linked to its utilization. 7 The most frequently assessed characteristics were influence on activity, 13–15,18,19,21,23,28,31,39,42,49,56,57,60,66,71,75–77,79–81,84,87,93,94,96,97,99–101,107–110 pain relief 13,17,18,21,23,28,32,56,57,59–62,72,73,77,81,84,87–89,93,94,99–101,105,106 and time of use. 12,…”

“…Keeping the orthosis clean 28,43,47, [90][91][92] • Cost 15,37,38, 71 Functional characteristics General efficacy 10,11,21,23,32,35,36,42,62,73,75,77,81,84,93,94,[99][100][101][107][108][109][110]114,115 • • Perception of joint stability 46,47,49,53,57,60,[90][91][92]97,104,[107][108][109][110]112 • • Influence on activity [13][14][15]18,19,21,23,28,31,39,…”

The Efficacy of Physical Fitness Training on Dance Injury: A Systematic Review

“…Although the selected studies reported significant positive benefits for the use of physical fitness training as an intervention, they used a variety of scales with only pain intensity or injury severity in common 31 33 34 38 39 49 50 . These are both subjective scales, and more replicable methods are needed as the case in sports injury surveillance 51 .…”

Foot orthoses for flexible flatfeet in children and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-reported outcome measures

“…Besides the nine studies included in this review, six prospective studies in children [28][29][30][31][32][33], one RCT [34], nine prospective [35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43] studies, and one retrospective study [44] in adults were identi ed which also described effectiveness of orthoses in terms of PROMs. However, these studies did not meet several of our inclusion criteria, i.e.…”