Background Several footwear design characteristics are known to have detrimental effects on the foot. However, one characteristic that has received relatively little attention is the point where the sole flexes in the sagittal plane. Several footwear assessment forms assume that this should ideally be located directly under the metarsophalangeal joints (MTPJs), but this has not been directly evaluated. The aim of this study was therefore to assess the influence on plantar loading of different locations of the shoe sole flexion point. Method Twenty-one asymptomatic females with normal foot posture participated. Standardised shoes were incised directly underneath the metatarsophalangeal joints, proximal to the MTPJs or underneath the midfoot. The participants walked in a randomised sequence of the three shoes whilst plantar loading patterns were obtained using the Pedar® in-shoe pressure measurement system. The foot was divided into nine anatomically important masks, and peak pressure (PP), contact time (CT) and pressure time integral (PTI) were determined. A ratio of PP and PTI between MTPJ2-3/MTPJ1 was also calculated. Results Wearing the shoe with the sole flexion point located proximal to the MTPJs resulted in increased PP under MTPJ 4–5 (6.2%) and decreased PP under the medial midfoot compared to the sub-MTPJ flexion point (−8.4%). Wearing the shoe with the sole flexion point located under the midfoot resulted in decreased PP, CT and PTI in the medial and lateral hindfoot (PP: −4.2% and −5.1%, CT: −3.4% and −6.6%, PTI: −6.9% and −5.7%) and medial midfoot (PP: −5.9% CT: −2.9% PTI: −12.2%) compared to the other two shoes. Conclusion The findings of this study indicate that the location of the sole flexion point of the shoe influences plantar loading patterns during gait. Specifically, shoes with a sole flexion point located under the midfoot significantly decrease the magnitude and duration of loading under the midfoot and hindfoot, which may be indicative of an earlier heel lift.
LINK
1. We assessed the hypothesized negative correlation between the influence of multiple predators and body condition and fecundity of the European hare, from 13 areas in the Netherlands. 2. Year-round abundance of predators was estimated by hunters. We quantified predator influence as the sum of their field metabolic rates, as this sum reflects the daily food requirements of multiple individuals. We determined the ratio between body mass and hindfoot length of hares as an index of body condition and the weight of their adrenal gland as a measure of chronic exposure to stress, and we counted the number of placental scars to estimate fecundity of hares. 3. As hypothesized, we found that the sum of field metabolic rate of predators was negatively correlated with body condition and the number of placental scars, whereas it was positively related to the weight of the adrenal glands. In contrast to the sum of the field metabolic rate, the total number of predators did not or weakly affect the investigated risk responses. 4. The sum of the field metabolic rate can be a useful proxy for the influence of multiple predators and takes into account predator abundance, type, body weight, and food requirements of multiple predators. 5. With our findings, our paper contributes to a better understanding of the risk effects of multiple predators on prey fitness. Additionally, we identify a potential contributor to the decline of European hare populations.
MULTIFILE
Objectives: Improving foot orthoses (FOs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) by using in-shoe plantar pressure measurements seems promising. The objectives of this study were to evaluate (1) the outcome on plantar pressure distribution of FOs that were adapted using in-shoe plantar pressure measurements according to a protocol and (2) the protocol feasibility. Methods: Forty-five RA patients with foot problems were included in this observational proof-of concept study. FOs were custom-made by a podiatrist according to usual care. Regions of Interest (ROIs) for plantar pressure reduction were selected. According to a protocol, usual care FOs were evaluated using in-shoe plantar pressure measurements and, if necessary, adapted. Plantar pressure–time integrals at the ROIs were compared between the following conditions: (1) no-FO versus usual care FO and (2) usual care FO versus adapted FO. Semi-structured interviews were held with patients and podiatrists to evaluate the feasibility of the protocol. Results: Adapted FOs were developed in 70% of the patients. In these patients, usual care FOs showed a mean 9% reduction in pressure–time integral at forefoot ROIs compared to no-FOs (p = 0.01). FO adaptation led to an additional mean 3% reduction in pressure–time integral (p = 0.05). The protocol was considered feasible by patients. Podiatrists considered the protocol more useful to achieve individual rather than general treatment goals. A final protocol was proposed. Conclusions: Using in-shoe plantar pressure measurements for adapting foot orthoses for patients with RA leads to a small additional plantar pressure reduction in the forefoot. Further research on the clinical relevance of this outcome is required.
