Comparison of the effectiveness of foot orthosis use in pes planus treatment with combination of kinesio taping

M. Karıksız, Cem Sever
{"title":"Comparison of the effectiveness of foot orthosis use in pes planus treatment with combination of kinesio taping","authors":"M. Karıksız, Cem Sever","doi":"10.5798/dicletip.1451528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical evaluations, disease impact, disability and foot function of symptomatic flexible pes planus (SFPP) deformity patients treated with the University of California at Berkeley Laboratory (UCBL) foot orthosis and Kinesio tape (KT) to those treated only with the UCBL orthosis. \nMethods: A total of 100 feet in 50 subjects with a mean age of 77.10 months were included in the study. The subjects were divided into two groups: Group 1 (UCBL foot orthosis with KT, n=27) and Group 2 (UCBL-alone, n=23). Group 1 consisted of 27 patients (14 girls, 13 boys) with an average age of 62 months (range: 25 to 165), while Group 2 consisted of 23 patients (10 girls,13 boys) with an average age of 63 months (range: 30 to 166). Various assessments, including American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores, anteroposterior and lateral talocalcaneal and talo-first metatarsal angles, talonavicular angle, calcaneal pitch angle and clinical examinations, were conducted to foot-specific disease activity, and foot function. \nResults: Group 1 exhibited mild-to-moderate foot disability and impairments, along with low levels of disease activity. Treatment with UCBL orthosis and Kinesio tape led to significant improvements in all AOFAS scores and foot angles. Substantial improvement in AOFAS scores was observed during the follow-up examination, except for the midfoot score. \nDiscussion: The use of UCBL foot orthosis in conjunction with Kinesio tape appears to be a preferable treatment strategy for children and adolescents with SFPP. This combined approach is associated with a lower rate of complications, higher patient comfort levels, and faster improvement in both radiological and clinical findings when compared to the use of the UCBL orthosis alone.","PeriodicalId":11203,"journal":{"name":"Dicle Tıp Dergisi","volume":"12 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dicle Tıp Dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5798/dicletip.1451528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: The aim of this study was to compare the clinical evaluations, disease impact, disability and foot function of symptomatic flexible pes planus (SFPP) deformity patients treated with the University of California at Berkeley Laboratory (UCBL) foot orthosis and Kinesio tape (KT) to those treated only with the UCBL orthosis. Methods: A total of 100 feet in 50 subjects with a mean age of 77.10 months were included in the study. The subjects were divided into two groups: Group 1 (UCBL foot orthosis with KT, n=27) and Group 2 (UCBL-alone, n=23). Group 1 consisted of 27 patients (14 girls, 13 boys) with an average age of 62 months (range: 25 to 165), while Group 2 consisted of 23 patients (10 girls,13 boys) with an average age of 63 months (range: 30 to 166). Various assessments, including American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores, anteroposterior and lateral talocalcaneal and talo-first metatarsal angles, talonavicular angle, calcaneal pitch angle and clinical examinations, were conducted to foot-specific disease activity, and foot function. Results: Group 1 exhibited mild-to-moderate foot disability and impairments, along with low levels of disease activity. Treatment with UCBL orthosis and Kinesio tape led to significant improvements in all AOFAS scores and foot angles. Substantial improvement in AOFAS scores was observed during the follow-up examination, except for the midfoot score. Discussion: The use of UCBL foot orthosis in conjunction with Kinesio tape appears to be a preferable treatment strategy for children and adolescents with SFPP. This combined approach is associated with a lower rate of complications, higher patient comfort levels, and faster improvement in both radiological and clinical findings when compared to the use of the UCBL orthosis alone.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在扁平足治疗中使用足部矫形器与结合使用肌动贴的效果比较
目的:本研究旨在比较接受加州大学伯克利分校实验室(UCBL)足部矫形器和 Kinesio 胶带(KT)治疗的症状性柔性趾畸形(SFPP)患者与仅接受 UCBL 矫形器治疗的患者的临床评估、疾病影响、残疾程度和足部功能。方法:研究共包括 50 名受试者的 100 只脚,平均年龄为 77.10 个月。受试者分为两组:第 1 组(UCBL 足部矫形器与 KT,n=27)和第 2 组(UCBL-单独,n=23)。第一组包括 27 名患者(14 名女孩,13 名男孩),平均年龄为 62 个月(范围:25 至 165);第二组包括 23 名患者(10 名女孩,13 名男孩),平均年龄为 63 个月(范围:30 至 166)。对足部特异性疾病活动性和足部功能进行了各种评估,包括美国骨科足踝协会(AOFAS)评分、距踝关节和距第一跖骨的前后角、外侧角、距关节角、小趾距角和临床检查。结果显示第一组表现出轻度至中度足部残疾和损伤,疾病活动度较低。使用 UCBL 矫正器和 Kinesio 胶带治疗后,所有 AOFAS 评分和足部角度均有显著改善。在随访检查中,除了中足评分外,AOFAS评分均有明显改善。讨论对于患有 SFPP 的儿童和青少年来说,UCBL 足部矫形器与 Kinesio 胶带的结合使用似乎是一种更可取的治疗策略。与单独使用 UCBL 足部矫形器相比,这种联合方法的并发症发生率更低、患者舒适度更高、放射学和临床结果改善更快。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
İntragastrik Balon Sonrası Gelişen Nadir Komplikasyon: Akut Pankreatit Uzamış COVID Hastalarında Simon Görevi ile Bilişsel Etkilerin Değerlendirilmesi Hemodiyaliz Hastalarında Okült Hepatit B ile Hepatit C Prevalansı ve Fibrometer ile Karaciğer Fibrozis Düzeyinin Değerlendirilmesi The role of triglyceride/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio in the prediction of intensive care unit admission in the earthquake victims Hiperprolaktinemisi Olan Pediatrik Olguların Klinik Özelliklerinin ve Hiperprolaktinemi Etiyolojilerinin Değerlendirilmesi
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1