Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Adults with flexible pes planus and the approach to the prescription of customised foot orthoses in clinical practice: a clinical records audit|
|Citation:||The Foot, 2015; 25(2):101-109|
|Helen A Banwell, Dominic Thewlis, Shylie Mackintosh|
|Abstract:||A clinical records audit of the University of South Australia's podiatry clinic clients attending in 2010 was undertaken to determine prevalence of symptomatic flexible pes planus, presenting reasons and treatment options most frequently used. Analysis of rearfoot measures (resting calcaneal stance position, subtalar joint range of motion) between those prescribed a vertical (heel) or inverted (heel) cast pour and a medial heel (Kirby) skive was undertaken. Of 223 clinical records audited, 50% (111/223) of clients were assessed with flexible pes planus, 77% (86/111) of clients with pes planus presented with back or lower limb pain and 58% (64/111) were prescribed customised foot orthoses. Of 42 prescriptions for customised foot orthoses audited; 64% (27/42) were prescribed a vertical (heel) cast pour, 36% (15/42) an inverted (heel) cast pour and 19% (8/42) received a medial heel (Kirby) skive. Those prescribed a medial heel (Kirby) skive had a more everted resting calcaneal stance position than those that were not (mean -8.6±2.8° vs. -5.5±3.4°, p=0.02). Those prescribed an inverted (heel) cast pour had a greater range of subtalar joint motion than those prescribed a vertical (heel) cast pour (median 36.0±10.0° vs. 29.0±5.0°, p=0.01).|
|Keywords:||Pes planus; planus; foot orthoses; prescription variables; clinical audit; podiatry|
|Rights:||Crown Copyright © 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.|
|Appears in Collections:||Aurora harvest 3|
Orthopaedics and Trauma publications
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.