Uploaded byRichard Baker
Cga ifa 2015 14 foot models
This document summarizes and compares different methods for assessing foot biomechanics and gait, including video-based scoring systems and multi-segment foot models. It focuses on the Oxford Foot Model (OFM), describing its segments, joint axes, markers, and measurements. The OFM allows measurement of motion between the tibia, hindfoot, forefoot, and hallux. It provides more detailed foot kinematic data than conventional gait models. A case study example shows how the OFM could provide additional insight over standard gait analysis.
More Related Content
![biomechanics ppt [Autosaved].pptx](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/biomechanicspptautosaved-230718063513-ada23ba5-thumbnail.jpg?width=640&height=640&fit=bounds)
Similar to Cga ifa 2015 14 foot models
More from Richard Baker
Cga ifa 2015 14 foot models
- 1. Understanding and modelling thedeformed foot Sarah Jarvis ORLAU, RJAH Orthopaedic Hospital
- 2. The Foot Complex structure Interfacebetween body and environment Poorly functioning foot can impact on walking ability
- 3.
- 4. What do wecurrently have?
- 6.
- 7. Video assessments • PhysicianRating Scale (Koman et al 1993) • Observational Gait Score (Boyd & Graham 1999) • Edinburgh Visual Gait Score (Read et al 2003) • Visual Gait Assessment Scale (Dickens & Smith 2006) • Salford Gait Tool (Torro et al 2007)
- 8. A scoring systemfor midfoot break No midfoot break Straight sole profile. Dorsiflexion at the ankle and extension at MTP joints
- 9. Moderate midfoot break Soleof the foot showing a curve Severe midfoot break Posterior part of the foot has a straight sole profile but dorsiflexion occurs at the midfoot relative to hindfoot
- 10. How many biomechanicalmodels do we have in the literature? • Systematic review Deschamps et al 2011 • 15 multi-segment foot models in the literature • Milwaukee foot model (Kidder et al 1996) • Oxford Foot Model (Carson et al 2001, Stebins et al 2006) • Heidelberg Foot measurement method (Simons et al 2006) • IOR Foot Model (Leardini et al 2007)
- 11. Oxford Foot Model •Originally designed to document foot deformity and as an outcome measure for club foot • Compatible with Plug in Gait • Not reliant on x-rays • Repeatable ? • Uses bony landmarks • Independent tibia segment • Hindfoot and forefoot segments with single marker for the hallux STAL LCAL P1 MT D1M T D5M T P5M T TOE HLX CAL2 CA L1 P1M T
- 12.
- 13.
- 14. Axes of theOFM Origin: ankle joint centre Primary axis: ankle joint centre - knee joint centre Med-lat axis: Bimalleolar axis 3rd : mutually perpendicular Tibial Axis
- 15. Tibia Markers • Tibialtubercle – most prominent part • Fibula head • Shin bone – half way between the tibial tubercle and the ankle joint
- 16. Hindfoot Axis Origin: Heel marker Primaxis: parallel to floor in plane of HEE, PCA and midpoint STL and LCA Med-lat axis: perpendicular to this plane 3rd axis: mutually perpendicular
- 17. Hindfoot markers • 3markers on the calcaneum (PCA, CPEG, HEE) • Medial hindfoot over sustentaculum tali (STAL) • 1 marker on lateral side of calcaneum (LCA) • Medial and lateral malleolar markers
- 18. Forefoot Axis Origin: Midpoint betweenP5M and P1M Prim axis: origin to TOE projected into the plane of P5M, D5M and D1M Vertical axis: perpendicular to this plane 3rd axis: mutually perpendicular Hallux Vector: D1M - HLX
- 19. Forefoot and Halluxmarkers • Base of 5th MT • Head of 5th MT • Head of 2nd MT • Medial aspect head of 1st MT • Medial aspect proximal phalanx of Hallux • Base of 1st Mt superior aspect
- 21. Knee Flexion (OFMtibia) 90 -20 deg Hindfoot/Tibia Dorsiflexion 30 -90 deg Fore/Hindfoot Dorsiflexion 50 -50 deg Forefoot/Tibia Dorsiflexion 30 -90 deg Hallux Dorsiflexion 50 -50 deg Knee Varus (OFM Tibia) 30 -30 deg Hindfoot/Tibia Varus 50 -50 deg Fore/Hindfoot Supination 50 -50 deg Forefoot/Tibia Supination 50 -50 deg Hallux Varus 50 -50 deg Knee Rotation (OFM tibia) 10 -60 deg Hindfoot/Tibia Rotation 50 -50 deg Fore/Hindfoot Rotation 50 -50 deg Forefoot/Tibia Adduction 50 -50 deg ArchHeightIndex 70 0 mm
- 22.
- 23.
- 24.
- 25. Case study • Whatinformation does the conventional gait model give us? • What additional information would the OFM give us?
- 27.
- 28.
- 29.
- 30.
- 31.