IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i3p1301-d732432.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Postural Control Differences between Patients with Posterior Tibial Tendon Dysfunction and Healthy People during Gait

Author

Listed:
  • Junsig Wang

    (Department of Sports Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Yongin-si 17014, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
    Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Science, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA)

  • L. Daniel Latt

    (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85724, USA)

  • Robert D. Martin

    (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Science, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA)

  • Erin M. Mannen

    (Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Arkansas for Medical Science, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA
    Mechanical and Biomedical Engineering Department, Boise State University, Boise, ID 83725, USA)

Abstract

Background: Patients with posterior tibial tendon dysfunction (PTTD) may exhibit postural instability during walking likely due to a loss of medial longitudinal arch, abnormal foot alignment, and pain. While many studies have investigated gait alterations in PTTD, there is no understanding of dynamic postural control mechanisms in this population during gait, which will help guide rehabilitation and gait training programs for patients with PTTD. The purpose of the study was to assess dynamic postural control mechanisms in patients with stage II PTTD as compared to age and gender matched healthy controls. Methods: Eleven patients with stage II PTTD (4 males and 7 females; age 59 ± 1 years; height 1.66 ± 0.12 m; mass 84.2 ± 16.0 kg) and ten gender and age matched controls were recruited in this study. Participants were asked to walk along a 10 m walkway. Ten Vicon cameras and four AMTI force platforms were used to collect kinematic and center of pressure (COP) data while participants performed gait. To test differences between PTTD vs. control groups, independent t -tests (set at α < 0.05) were performed. Results: Patients with PTTD had significantly higher double stance ratio (+23%) and anterior-posterior (AP) time to contact (TTC) percentage (+16%) as compared to healthy control. However, PTTD had lower AP COP excursion (−19%), AP COP velocity (−30%), and medial-lateral (ML) COP velocity (−40%) as compared to healthy controls. Mean ML COP trace values for PTTD were significantly decreased (−23%) as compared to controls, indicating COP trace for PTTD tends to be closer to the medial boundary than controls during single-support phase of walking. Conclusion: PTTD patients showed more conservative and cautious postural strategies which may help maintain balance and reduce the need for postural adjustment during PTTD gait. They also showed more medially shifted COP patterns than healthy controls during single-support phase of walking. Dynamic postural control outcomes could be used to develop effective gait training programs aimed at alleviating a medial shift of COP (everted foot) for individuals with PTTD in order to improve their functionality and gait efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Junsig Wang & L. Daniel Latt & Robert D. Martin & Erin M. Mannen, 2022. "Postural Control Differences between Patients with Posterior Tibial Tendon Dysfunction and Healthy People during Gait," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-9, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:1301-:d:732432
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/3/1301/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/3/1301/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:3:p:1301-:d:732432. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.