Hand, foot, and mouth disease: A case report

Hand, foot, and mouth disease is a viral infection related to coxsackieviruses A5, A6, A9, and A10, coxsackieviruses B2 and B5, and echovirus 11. It generally affects children, but this article presents a clinical case of a young woman with hand, foot, and mouth disease. Patients with this disease have oral and skin lesions that may be confused with other diseases. The differential diagnosis is very important because both dental and medical professionals may misdiagnose the disease and sometimes prescribe an inappropriate medication.

Effect of inaccuracies in anthropometric data and linked-segment inverse dynamic modeling on kinetics of gait in persons with partial foot amputation

The accuracy of data derived from linked-segment models depends on how well the system has been represented. Previous investigations describing the gait of persons with partial foot amputation did not account for the unique anthropometry of the residuum or the inclusion of a prosthesis and footwear in the model and, as such, are likely to have underestimated the magnitude of the peak joint moments and powers. This investigation determined the effect of inaccuracies in the anthropometric input data on the kinetics of gait. Toward this end, a geometric model was developed and validated to estimate body segment parameters of various intact and partial feet. These data were then incorporated into customized linked-segment models, and the kinetic data were compared with that obtained from conventional models. Results indicate that accurate modeling increased the magnitude of the peak hip and knee joint moments and powers during terminal swing. Conventional inverse dynamic models are sufficiently accurate for research questions relating to stance phase. More accurate models that account for the anthropometry of the residuum, prosthesis, and footwear better reflect the work of the hip extensors and knee flexors to decelerate the limb during terminal swing phase.

Elective foot and ankle surgery : activity and perioperative complications in Queensland public hospitals, Australia

Objective: To conduct an audit of elective foot and ankle surgery in Queensland public hospitals and to compare the frequency of these procedures performed to other states and territories of Australia. ---------- Methods: ICD-10-AM data was used to extract elective foot and ankle procedures from the Data Services Unit of Queensland Health, and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare between the years of 2000 and 2004. ---------- Results During the 4-year audit period 3846 primary procedures were performed during the 4-year period with a complication rate of 2.2% during the hospital admission period. Mean length of stay was 1.7 days. Post-operative infection rates were 0.26%. With the exception of Tasmania and the Northern Territory, Queensland performs the least number of elective foot and ankle procedures per capita per year in Australia. ---------- Conclusions This is the first reported audit of elective foot and ankle surgery for Queensland public hospitals. Complication rates cannot be directly compared to the literature as this data could only capture complications within hospital admission period. Fewer elective foot and ankle procedures were performed in Queensland public hospitals compared to all other mainland states of Australia during the data collection period.

An investigation of foot and ankle problems experienced by nurses

Relatively little information has been reported about foot and ankle problems experienced by nurses, despite anecdotal evidence which suggests they are common ailments. The purpose of this study was to improve knowledge about the prevalence of foot and ankle musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and to explore relationships between these MSDs and proposed risk factors. A review of the literature relating to work-related MSDs, MSDs in nursing, foot and lower-limb MSDs, screening for work-related MSDs, foot discomfort, footwear and the prevalence of foot problems in the community was undertaken. Based on the review, theoretical risk factors were proposed that pertained to the individual characteristics of the nurses, their work activity or their work environment. Three studies were then undertaken. A cross-sectional survey of 304 nurses, working in a large tertiary paediatric hospital, established the prevalence of foot and ankle MSDs. The survey collected information about self-reported risk factors of interest. The second study involved the clinical examination of a subgroup of 40 nurses, to examine changes in body discomfort, foot discomfort and postural sway over the course of a single work shift. Objective measurements of additional risk factors, such as individual foot posture (arch index) and the hardness of shoe midsoles, were performed. A final study was used to confirm the test-retest reliability of important aspects of the survey and key clinical measurements. Foot and ankle problems were the most common MSDs experienced by nurses in the preceding seven days (42.7% of nurses). They were the second most common MSDs to cause disability in the last 12 months (17.4% of nurses), and the third most common MSDs experienced by nurses in the last 12 months (54% of nurses). Substantial foot discomfort (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score of 50mm or more) was experienced by 48.5% of nurses at sometime in the last 12 months. Individual risk factors, such as obesity and the number of self-reported foot conditions (e.g., callouses, curled toes, flat feet) were strongly associated with the likelihood of experiencing foot problems in the last seven days or during the last 12 months. These risk factors showed consistent associations with disabling foot conditions and substantial foot discomfort. Some of these associations were dependent upon work-related risk factors, such as the location within the hospital and the average hours worked per week. Working in the intensive care unit was associated with higher odds of experiencing foot problems within the last seven days, foot problems in the last 12 months and foot problems that impaired activity in the last 12 months. Changes in foot discomfort experienced within a day, showed large individual variability. Fifteen of the forty nurses experienced moderate/substantial foot discomfort at the end of their shift (VAS 25+mm). Analysis of the association between risk factors and moderate/substantial foot discomfort revealed that foot discomfort was less likely for nurses who were older, had greater BMI or had lower foot arches, as indicated by higher arch index scores. The nurses’ postural sway decreased over the course of the work shift, suggesting improved body balance by the end of the day. These findings were unexpected. Further clinical studies examining individual nurses on several work shifts are needed to confirm these results, particularly due to the small sample size and the single measurement occasion. There are more than 280,000 nurses registered to practice in Australia. The nursing workforce is ageing and the prevalence of foot problems will increase. If the prevalence estimates from this study are extrapolated to the profession generally, more than 70,000 hospital nurses have experienced substantial foot discomfort and 25-30,000 hospital nurses have been limited in their activity due to foot problems during the last 12 months. Nurses with underlying foot conditions were more likely to report having foot problems at work. Strategies to prevent or manage foot conditions exist and they should be disseminated to nurses. Obesity is a significant risk factor for foot and ankle MSDs and these nurses may need particular assistance to manage foot problems. The risk of foot problems for particular groups of nurses, e.g. obese nurses, may vary depending upon the location within the hospital. Further research is needed to confirm the findings of this study. Similar studies should be conducted in other occupational groups that require workers to stand for prolonged periods.

The Foot Heath Status Questionnaire : correct scale score calculation

This letter is in response to the recently published article “Evaluation of two self-referent foot health instruments” by Robert Trevethan (RT) and is in regard to the scale scores he derived when using the quality of life measure, the Foot Health Status Questionnaire [1]. Unfortunately, the journal reviewers and editor did not identify, or address, a fundamental flaw in the methodology of this paper. Subsequently, the inference drawn from this paper could, in all reasonableness, mislead the reader

Development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure foot-health status

The aim of this study was to apply the principles of content, criterion, and construct validation to a new questionnaire specifically designed to measure foot-health status. One hundred eleven subjects completed two different questionnaires designed to measure foot health (the new Foot Health Status Questionnaire and the previously validated Foot Function Index) and underwent a clinical examination in order to provide data for a second-order confirmatory factor analysis. Presented herein is a psychometrically evaluated questionnaire that contains 13 items covering foot pain, foot function, footwear, and general foot health. The tool demonstrates a high degree of content, criterion, and construct validity and test-retest reliability.

Land buyers likely to foot reform costs

Article in Courier Mail. Friday July 22, 2011.

The reliability, accuracy and minimal detectable difference of a multi-segment kinematic model of the foot-shoe complex

Kinematic models are commonly used to quantify foot and ankle kinematics, yet no marker sets or models have been proven reliable or accurate when wearing shoes. Further, the minimal detectable difference of a developed model is often not reported. We present a kinematic model that is reliable, accurate and sensitive to describe the kinematics of the foot–shoe complex and lower leg during walking gait. In order to achieve this, a new marker set was established, consisting of 25 markers applied on the shoe and skin surface, which informed a four segment kinematic model of the foot–shoe complex and lower leg. Three independent experiments were conducted to determine the reliability, accuracy and minimal detectable difference of the marker set and model. Inter-rater reliability of marker placement on the shoe was proven to be good to excellent (ICC = 0.75–0.98) indicating that markers could be applied reliably between raters. Intra-rater reliability was better for the experienced rater (ICC = 0.68–0.99) than the inexperienced rater (ICC = 0.38–0.97). The accuracy of marker placement along each axis was <6.7 mm for all markers studied. Minimal detectable difference (MDD90) thresholds were defined for each joint; tibiocalcaneal joint – MDD90 = 2.17–9.36°, tarsometatarsal joint – MDD90 = 1.03–9.29° and the metatarsophalangeal joint – MDD90 = 1.75–9.12°. These thresholds proposed are specific for the description of shod motion, and can be used in future research designed at comparing between different footwear.

Recommendations for the reporting of foot and ankle models

Multiple marker sets and models are currently available for assessing foot and ankle kinematics in gait. Despite the presence of such a wide variety of models, the reporting of methodological designs remains inconsistent and lacks clearly defined standards. This review highlights the variability found when reporting biomechanical model parameters, methodological design, and model reliability. Further, the review clearly demonstrates the need for a consensus of what methodological considerations to report in manuscripts, which focus on the topic of foot and ankle biomechanics. We propose five minimum reporting standards, that we believe will ensure the transparency of methods and begin to allow the community to move towards standard modelling practice. The strict adherence to these standards should ultimately improve the interpretation and clinical useability of foot and ankle marker sets and their corresponding models.

Defining standards for modelling the biomechanics of the foot and ankle : a systematic review

The complex interaction of the bones of the foot has been explored in detail in recent years, which has led to the acknowledgement in the biomechanics community that the foot can no longer be considered as a single rigid segment. With the advance of motion analysis technology it has become possible to quantify the biomechanics of simplified units or segments that make up the foot. Advances in technology coupled with reducing hardware prices has resulted in the uptake of more advanced tools available for clinical gait analysis. The increased use of these techniques in clinical practice requires defined standards for modelling and reporting of foot and ankle kinematics. This systematic review aims to provide a critical appraisal of commonly used foot and ankle marker sets designed to assess kinematics and thus provide a theoretical background for the development of modelling standards.

A Systematic Review of kinematic models used in foot & ankle biomechanics

Over the past decade our understanding of foot function has increased significantly[1,2]. Our understanding of foot and ankle biomechanics appears to be directly correlated to advances in models used to assess and quantify kinematic parameters in gait. These advances in models in turn lead to greater detail in the data. However, we must consider that the level of complexity is determined by the question or task being analysed. This systematic review aims to provide a critical appraisal of commonly used marker sets and foot models to assess foot and ankle kinematics in a wide variety of clinical and research purposes.