midsole and less proprioceptive feedback for stability
(Barnes and Smith, 1994).- Shoes with a softer durometer midsole allowed signif-
icantly increased pronation and total rear foot move-
ment when compared to medium or hard midsoles
(Clarke, Fredrick, and Hamill, 1983).
•With shoe changes, muscle-firing patterns occurred
uniquely in a subject specific manner due to anatomi-
cal variation in connective tissue density. This demon-
strates that shoe construction can be picked for a
specific runner to affect treatment and prevention of
lower quarter injuries, decrease fatigue, and increase
performance (Hennig and Milani, 1995). - Functional stability of the foot requires effective
muscle contraction, coordination, and firing patterns.
Fatigued muscle firing patterns cause increased peak
strain on the lower extremity, thus leading to injury.
This is important since both patellofemoral pain syn-
drome and osteoarthritis have been linked to abnormal
muscle firing patterns (Arrol et al, 1997; Hurley,
1999; Kannus and Nittymaki, 1994; Slemenda et al,
1997). - Benefits of proper footwear positioning have improved
biomechanical disposition toward illiotibial band syn-
drome and tibial stress syndrome (Barnes and Smith,
1994). - Despite claims, no manufacturer has successfully
achieved energy return in footwear testing.
Shoemakers have made functional gains in minimizing
energy lost through lightweight alterations in materials
(Stefanyshyn and Nigg, 2000). - Proper footwear has been shown to increase internal sta-
bility and decrease onset time to achieve stabilization in
the low back via postural changes (Ogon et al, 2001). - Increases in ankle stability caused by structural support
and high collars have not been supported; however, a
firm midsole will provide benefits in tactile sensitivity
and proprioception, which increase foot position
awareness and decrease time to initiation of intrinsic
muscles (Barrett, 1993; Robbins and Waked, 1998).
CONCLUSION
- Shoe trends have progressively evolved for today’s
athletes. While today’s research does illustrate benefits
in proper shoe construction and use, the shoe changes
are often met with compensatory gait patterns (Nigg
et al, 2003; Wakeling, Pascual, and Nigg, 2002; Kurz
and Stergiou, 2003). These biomechanical changes
make it difficult to discern if the benefits are attributed
to footwear changes (proprioceptive changes vs. force
vector changes). New improved force measuring
devices will increase our accuracy of force vector
relationships. These breakthroughs will enable us to
increase the specificity of footwear to maximize out-
comes and decreases chronic stress levels on the body.REFERENCES
American Physical Rehabilitation Network: When the feet hit the
ground everything changes. Course notes, 1984.
Arrol BE, Ellis-Peleger A, Edwards A, et al: Patellofemoral pain
syndrome. A critical review of the clinical trials on non-opera-
tive therapy. Am J Sports Med25:207–212, 1997.
Ball K, Afheldt M: Evolution of foot orthotics—Part 1: Coherent
theory or coherent practice? J Manipulative Physiol Ther
25:116–124, 2002a.
Ball K, Afheldt M: Evolution of foot orthotics—Part 2: Research
reshapes long-standing theory. J Manipulative Physiol Ther
25:125–134, 2002b.
Barnes RA, Smith PD: The role of footwear in minimizing lower
limb injury. J Sport Sci12(4):341–353, 1994.
Barrett JR: High versus low-top shoes for the prevention of ankle
sprains in basketball players. A prospective randomized study.
Am J Sports Med21(4):582–585, 1993.
Benard M, Goldsmith H, Gurnick K, et al: Prescription
Custom Foot Orthoses Practice Guidelines. The American
College of Foot and Ankle Orthopedics and Medicine, Ellicott,
MD, Nov 2002, pp 1–32.
Bowman G: New concepts in orthotic management of the adult
hyperpronated foot: Preliminary findings. J Prosthet Orthot
9(2):77, 1997.
Churchill R, Donley B: Managing injuries of the Great Toe. Phys
Sports Med26(8):280–295, 1998.
Clarke TE, Fredrick EC, Hamill CL: The effects of shoe design
parameters on rearfoot control in running. Med Sci Sports
15(5):376–381, 1983.
Cornwall M, McPoil T: Effect of foot orthotics on the initiation
of plantar surface loading. The Foot7:148–152, 1997.
Cornwall M, McPoil T: The Foot and Ankle: Current Concepts in
Mechanics, Examination, and Orthotic Intervention. PT 2003:
Annual Conference & Exposition of the American Physical
Therapy Association. Course Notes. Washington, DC, June
18–22, 2003.
Cummings GS, Higbie EJ: A weight bearing method for deter-
mining forefoot posting for orthotic fabrication. Physiother
Res Int2(1):42–50, 1997.
Dannanberg H, Guiliano M: Chronic low-back pain and its
response to custom-made foot orthoses. J Amer Pod Med Assoc
89(3):109–117, 1999.
Donatelli R, Hurlbert C, Conway D, et al: Biomechanical foot
orthotics: A retrospective study. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther
10:205–212, 1988.
Ekenman I, Milgrom C, Finestone A, et al: The role of biome-
chanical shoe orthoses in tibial stress fracture prevention. Am
J Sports Med30(6):866–870, 2002.440 SECTION 5 • PRINCIPLES OF REHABILITATION