Discipline of Podiatry, School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3086, Australia.
La Trobe Sport and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, 3086, Australia.
J Foot Ankle Res. 2020 May 6;13(1):18. doi: 10.1186/s13047-020-00388-x.
Forefoot pads such as metatarsal domes are commonly used in clinical practice for the treatment of pressure-related forefoot pain, however evidence for their effects is inconsistent. This study aimed to evaluate the effects on plantar pressures of metatarsal domes in different positions relative to the metatarsal heads.
Participants in this study included 36 community-dwelling adults aged 65 or older with a history of forefoot pain. Standardised footwear was used and plantar pressures were measured using the pedar®-X in-shoe plantar pressure measurement system. Peak pressure, maximum force and contact area were analysed using an anatomically-based masking protocol that included three forefoot mask sub-areas (proximal to, beneath, and distal to the metatarsal heads). Data were collected for two different types of prefabricated metatarsal domes of different densities (Emsold metatarsal dome and Langer PPT metatarsal pad) in three different positions relative to the metatarsal heads. Seven conditions were tested in this study: (i) control (no pad) condition, (ii) Emsold metatarsal dome positioned 5 mm proximal to the metatarsal heads, (iii) Emsold metatarsal dome positioned in-line with the metatarsal heads, (iv), Emsold metatarsal dome positioned 5 mm distal to the metatarsal heads, (v) Langer PPT metatarsal pad positioned 5 mm proximal to the metatarsal heads, (vi) Langer PPT metatarsal pad positioned in-line with the metatarsal heads, and (vii) Langer PPT metatarsal pad positioned 5 mm distal to the metatarsal heads.
When analysed with the mask that was distal to the metatarsal heads, where the plantar pressure readings were at their highest, all metatarsal dome conditions led to significant reductions in plantar pressure at the forefoot compared to the control (no pad) condition (F = 8.125, p < 0.001). The reductions in plantar pressure were in the order of 45-60 kPa. Both the Emsold metatarsal dome and the Langer PPT metatarsal pad, when positioned proximal to the metatarsal heads, managed to achieve this without adversely increasing plantar pressure proximally where the pad was positioned, however the Emsold metatarsal dome was most effective.
Metatarsal domes reduce plantar pressure in the forefoot in older people with a history of forefoot pain. All metatarsal dome conditions significantly reduced peak pressure in the forefoot, however metatarsal domes that were positioned 5 mm proximal to the metatarsal heads provided the best balance of reducing plantar pressure distal to the metatarsal heads, where the pressure is at its greatest, but not adversely increasing plantar pressure proximally, where the bulk of the pad is positioned. In this proximal position, the Emsold metatarsal dome was more effective than the Langer PPT metatarsal pad and we cautiously recommend this forefoot pad for alleviating forefoot pressure in older people with forefoot pain.
跖骨垫(如跖骨穹顶)常用于临床治疗与压力相关的前足疼痛,但关于其疗效的证据并不一致。本研究旨在评估跖骨穹顶相对于跖骨头处于不同位置时对跖骨下压力的影响。
本研究纳入了 36 名 65 岁及以上、有前足疼痛史的社区居住成年人。使用标准鞋,并使用 pedar®-X 足底压力测量系统进行足底压力测量。使用基于解剖学的掩蔽协议分析峰值压力、最大力和接触面积,该协议包括前足掩蔽子区域(跖骨头近端、下方和远端)的三个部分。研究中测试了两种不同密度的预制跖骨穹顶(Emsold 跖骨穹顶和 Langer PPT 跖骨垫)在相对于跖骨头的三种不同位置。本研究共测试了七种情况:(i)对照(无垫)条件,(ii)Emsold 跖骨穹顶置于跖骨头近端 5mm 处,(iii)Emsold 跖骨穹顶与跖骨头平齐,(iv)Emsold 跖骨穹顶置于跖骨头远端 5mm 处,(v)Langer PPT 跖骨垫置于跖骨头近端 5mm 处,(vi)Langer PPT 跖骨垫与跖骨头平齐,(vii)Langer PPT 跖骨垫置于跖骨头远端 5mm 处。
当使用位于跖骨头远端的掩蔽时,那里的足底压力读数最高,所有跖骨穹顶条件都导致前足的足底压力与对照(无垫)条件相比显著降低(F=8.125,p<0.001)。足底压力降低幅度在 45-60kPa 之间。Emsold 跖骨穹顶和 Langer PPT 跖骨垫置于跖骨头近端时,都能在不增加垫所在近端的足底压力的情况下达到这一效果,但 Emsold 跖骨穹顶的效果最显著。
跖骨穹顶可降低前足疼痛老年人前足的足底压力。所有跖骨穹顶条件都显著降低了前足的峰值压力,但置于跖骨头近端 5mm 处的跖骨穹顶在降低跖骨远端(压力最大)的足底压力方面效果最佳,而不会增加垫所在近端的足底压力,因为大部分垫都位于该位置。在这个近端位置,Emsold 跖骨穹顶比 Langer PPT 跖骨垫更有效,我们谨慎地建议使用这种前足垫来缓解有前足疼痛的老年人的前足压力。