We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Comparison of walking energy cost between an anterior and a posterior ankle-foot orthosis in people with foot drop.
Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine 2014 September
OBJECTIVE: To compare walking energy cost between an anterior and a posterior ankle-foot orthosis in people with foot drop.
DESIGN: Within-group comparisons.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three adults (14 women, 9 men; mean age 56.8 years (standard deviation 15.4)) with foot drop.
METHODS: PARTICIPANTS were asked to walk for 5 min at their self-selected walking speed under 3 conditions: (i) with shoes only; (ii) with a posterior ankle-foot orthosis; (iii) with an anterior ankle-foot orthosis. Spatio-temporal gait para-meters (speed, step length and step frequency) and walking energy cost per unit of distance were assessed for each walking condition. A visual analogue scale was used to quantify participants' level of perceived comfort for the 2 orthosis.
RESULTS: Gait spatio-temporal parameters were higher with anterior ankle-foot orthoses than with posterior ankle-foot orthoses or shoes only. Walking energy cost per unit of distance was lower with anterior than posterior ankle-foot orthosis or shoes only ((mean ± standard error) 3.53 ± 1.00 vs 3.94 ± 1.27 and 3.98 ± 1.53 J·kg-1·m-1 respectively; p < 0.05) and level of perceived comfort was higher with anterior ((mean ± standard error) 8.00 ± 1.32) than with posterior ankle-foot orthosis ((mean ± standard error) 4.52 ± 2.57; p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: In people with foot drop the use of anterior ankle-foot orthoses resulted in lower energy costs of walking and higher levels of perceived comfort compared with posterior ankle-foot orthoses. Anterior ankle-foot orthoses may enable people with foot drop to walk further with less physical effort than posterior ankle-foot orthoses.
DESIGN: Within-group comparisons.
PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three adults (14 women, 9 men; mean age 56.8 years (standard deviation 15.4)) with foot drop.
METHODS: PARTICIPANTS were asked to walk for 5 min at their self-selected walking speed under 3 conditions: (i) with shoes only; (ii) with a posterior ankle-foot orthosis; (iii) with an anterior ankle-foot orthosis. Spatio-temporal gait para-meters (speed, step length and step frequency) and walking energy cost per unit of distance were assessed for each walking condition. A visual analogue scale was used to quantify participants' level of perceived comfort for the 2 orthosis.
RESULTS: Gait spatio-temporal parameters were higher with anterior ankle-foot orthoses than with posterior ankle-foot orthoses or shoes only. Walking energy cost per unit of distance was lower with anterior than posterior ankle-foot orthosis or shoes only ((mean ± standard error) 3.53 ± 1.00 vs 3.94 ± 1.27 and 3.98 ± 1.53 J·kg-1·m-1 respectively; p < 0.05) and level of perceived comfort was higher with anterior ((mean ± standard error) 8.00 ± 1.32) than with posterior ankle-foot orthosis ((mean ± standard error) 4.52 ± 2.57; p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: In people with foot drop the use of anterior ankle-foot orthoses resulted in lower energy costs of walking and higher levels of perceived comfort compared with posterior ankle-foot orthoses. Anterior ankle-foot orthoses may enable people with foot drop to walk further with less physical effort than posterior ankle-foot orthoses.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app