UNASSIGNED: Despite ample evidence supporting ankle foot orthoses (AFOs) for enhancing ambulation in those with neuromuscular impairment, a prevalent belief among rehabilitation professionals is that AFO use may lead to disuse and reduced muscle activity of the lower leg. To determine the effects of AFO intervention on electromyography (EMG) activity during walking in individuals with neuromuscular impairment.
UNASSIGNED: Five databases were searched for studies that met the predefined inclusion criteria and were published any time through April 2024. AFO design characteristics, muscle groups measured, study design, experimental comparisons, and EMG parameters were extracted from each study. Methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the modified PEDro scale.
UNASSIGNED: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria. AFO interventions utilized, EMG outcomes utilized, and result interpretations varied widely. In situations of hypertonicity, reduced EMG activity was deemed a positive outcome, while other studies viewed it negatively. Seven longitudinal studies found no adverse long-term impact on EMG activity.
UNASSIGNED: The results of this review challenge the clinical belief that AFOs cause muscle disuse over time; however, the heterogeneity of AFO designs prevents broad statements related to which orthoses optimize muscle activity.
Ankle foot Orthosis (AFO) intervention demonstrates diverse effects on the timing and amplitude of electromyography (EMG) measures, with significant variability in direction, magnitude, and interpretation across studies, necessitating personalized approaches.Longitudinal studies refute concerns about adverse effects on EMG activity with prolonged AFO use, challenging the notion of decreased muscle activation and supporting the safety of extended AFO utilization.Clinicians are advised to differentiate between peripheral and central nervous system disorders when considering AFO intervention, emphasizing the need to align AFO goals with the patient’s clinical presentation and carefully weigh the known advantages associated with AFO utilization.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this systematic review is to determine the benefits and harms of heel lifts to any comparator for lower limb musculoskeletal conditions.
METHODS: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid AMED, Ovid EMCARE, CINAHL Plus and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception to the end of May 2024. Randomised, quasi-randomised or non-randomised trials comparing heel lifts to any other intervention or no-treatment were eligible for inclusion. Data was extracted for the outcomes of pain, disability/function, participation, participant rating of overall condition, quality of life, composite measures and adverse events. Two authors independently assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach at the primary time point 12 weeks (or next closest).
RESULTS: Eight trials (n = 903), investigating mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy, calcaneal apophysitis and plantar heel pain were included. Heel lifts were compared to exercise, ultrasound, cryotherapy orthotics, stretching, footwear, activity modification, felt pads and analgesic medication. No outcome was at low risk of bias and few effects (2 out of 47) were clinically important. Low-certainty evidence (1 trial, n = 199) indicates improved pain relief (55.7 points [95% CI: 50.3-61.1], on a 100 mm visual analogue scale) with custom orthotics compared to heel lifts at 12 weeks for calcaneal apophysitis. Very low-certainty evidence (1 trial, n = 62) indicates improved pain and function with heel lifts over indomethacin (35.5 points [95% CI: 21.1-49.9], Foot Function Index) at 12 months for plantar heel pain.
CONCLUSIONS: Few trials have assessed the benefits and harms of heel lifts for lower limb musculoskeletal conditions. Only two outcomes out of 47 showed clinically meaningful between group differences. However, due to very low to low certainty evidence we are unable to be confident in the results and the true effect may be substantially different.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO registration number CRD42022309644.

UNASSIGNED: Systematic review.
UNASSIGNED: Proximal phalangeal fractures of the hand are challenging to treat, and significantly impact hand function and quality of life if poorly managed.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review to determine the efficacy of conservatively managed extra-articular proximal phalanx fractures to optimise recovery and prevent the need for surgical intervention and its associated risks.
UNASSIGNED: A literature search that included variations of the phrases \'proximal phalanx\', \'fracture\' and \'conservative management\' was performed on 17 December 2023 using seven electronic databases and trial registries. Article screening, data extraction and critical appraisal using the Structured Effectiveness Quality Evaluation scale was performed independently.
UNASSIGNED: Seven studies that captured 389 fractures from 356 unique patients were included. Studies were of level II to IV evidence and included one comparative cohort study and six prospective case series. Interventions involved timely rehabilitation, a plaster or orthotic device, controlled metacarpophalangeal joint flexion and free mobilisation of the interphalangeal joints. A weighted mean total active motion score of 249° was achieved, with 99.5% (387/389) of fractures achieving union.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic review cautions against definitive recommendations on conservative techniques for managing proximal phalanx fractures due to limitations of the available literature. However, our findings tentatively supports non-operative approaches as an alternative to surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Orthosis after lumbar fusion surgery is common. However, the evidence for benefit remains to be determined, especially in tropical areas with heavy workers. To investigate postoperative orthosis and whether it affects pain improvement, quality of life, and fusion rate.
METHODS: From May 2021 to May 2022, this single-center prospective randomized clinical trial enrolled 110 patients. We excluded 9 patients, and 101 people were analyzed finally. Corset group, in which participants used a corset for 3 months postoperatively; Non-corset group, in which participants didn\'t wear any orthosis. ODI and VAS scale were recorded before the surgery: 2 weeks, 1 month, 3 months, half a year, and 1 year postoperatively. The lumbar X-ray was done before the surgery, 6 months postoperatively. All complications in 1 year were recorded.
RESULTS: Significant decrease in VAS score in the non-corset group since post-operation day 5 (corset group 3.44 ± 1.77, non-corset group 3.36 ± 1.75, P = .0093) during admission, and also a decrease in admission duration (corset group 11.08 ± 2.39, non-corset group 9.55 ± 1.75, P = .0004) were found. There was a significantly better ODI score in the non-corset group since post-operation 1 month, while in the corset group until post-operation 3 months. Both groups had no significant difference in satisfaction, complication rates, and X-ray results, such as fusion, angular rotation, sagittal transition, and slip in the neutral position.
CONCLUSIONS: After the transpedicular screw fixation with posterolateral fusion surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis, non-orthosis is a safe strategy. It can reduce the admission duration and has the trend for better functional outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Health specialists suggest a conservative approach comprising non-pharmacological interventions as the initial course of action for individuals with repetitive ankle sprain due to ankle instability. This systematic review aimed to assess the effectiveness of biomechanical devices (Foot Orthoses, Ankle Orthoses, and Taping) on gait and muscle activity in individuals with ankle instability.
METHODS: A systematic search was performed on electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Clinical Trials.gov, Web of Science, and Scopus. The PEDro scoring system was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. We extracted data from population, intervention, and outcome measures.
RESULTS: In the initial search, we found 247 articles. After following the steps of the PRISMA flowchart, only 22 reports met the inclusion criteria of this study. The results show that biomechanical device therapy may increase swing time, stance time, and step. Additionally, studies suggest that these devices can reduce plantar flexion, inversion, and motion variability during gait. Biomechanical devices have the potential to optimize the subtalar valgus moment, push-off, and braking forces exerted during walking, as well as enhance the activity of specific muscles including the peroneus longus, peroneus brevis, tibialis anterior, gluteus medius, lateral gastrocnemius, rectus femoris, and soleus.
CONCLUSIONS: Biomechanical devices affect gait (spatiotemporal, kinetic, and kinematic variables) and lower limb muscle activity (root mean square, reaction time, amplitude, reflex, and wave) in subjects with ankle instability.

When a limb suffers a fracture, rupture, or dislocation, it is traditionally immobilized with plaster. This may induce discomfort in the patient, as well as excessive itching and sweating, which creates the growth of bacteria, leading to an unhygienic environment and difficulty in keeping the injury clean during treatment. Furthermore, if the plaster remains for a long period, it may cause lesions in the joints and ligaments. To overcome all of these disadvantages, orthoses have emerged as important medical devices to help patients in rehabilitation, as well as for self-care of deficiencies in clinics and daily life. Traditionally, these devices are produced manually, which is a time-consuming and error-prone method. From another point of view, it is possible to use imageology (X-ray or computed tomography) to scan the human body; a process that may help orthoses manufacturing but which induces radiation to the patient. To overcome this great disadvantage, several types of 3D scanners, without any kind of radiation, have emerged. This article describes the use of various types of scanners capable of digitizing the human body to produce custom orthoses. Studies have shown that photogrammetry is the most used and most suitable 3D scanner for the acquisition of the human body in 3D. With this evolution of technology, it is possible to decrease the scanning time and it will be possible to introduce this technology into clinical environment.

The objective of this study was to determine the effectiveness of upper extremity orthoses on improving performance skills and performance of occupations after stroke. Databases searched included CINAHL, PubMed, and OT Seeker. Articles were included if published between 2012 to 2022, English, peer-reviewed, level of evidence IB, IIB, or IIIB, and included upper extremity orthoses, adults after a stroke, and performance skill and performance of occupation outcome measures; six studies meet inclusion criteria. Moderate strength of evidence supports the usage of dynamic upper extremity orthoses to improve performance skills, although they do not improve performance of occupations for adults after stroke. Evidence suggests practitioners should utilize dynamic orthoses concurrently with tasks that promote performance skills such as gripping, pinching, grasping, and reaching during interventions to promote upper extremity use after stroke. Additional research is needed to further justify the use of upper extremity orthoses for performance of occupations after stroke.

BACKGROUND: Wearing spinal orthosis for 16 to 23 hours a day during the teenage years could be challenging and stressful for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). The investigation of clinical outcomes under various orthosis-wearing compliances can provide helpful insight into orthotic treatment dosage. This systematic review aims to investigate actual orthosis-wearing compliance and evaluate the effectiveness of orthotic treatment in controlling scoliotic curvature and preventing surgery for patients with AIS under various levels of orthosis-wearing compliance.
METHODS: A literature search of 7 electronic databases, namely PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, CINAHL Complete, Web of Science, and Embase, was conducted on May 19, 2023. Participant characteristics, orthotic treatment protocols, compliance information, outcome measures, and key findings were extracted. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scales were used to evaluate the quality of included cohort and case-control studies.
RESULTS: This study systematically reviewed 17 of 1,799 identified studies, including 1,981 subjects. The actual compliance was inconsistent and ranged from 7.0 to 18.8 hours daily. The proportion of compliant subjects in each study varied from 16.0% to 78.6% due to the heterogeneity of calculation period, measurement methods, and orthosis prescription time. Thirteen studies were investigated to determine the effectiveness of orthotic treatment in controlling curve deformity under different compliance groups, and 2 studies compared the compliance under different treatment outcomes. The rate of curve progression, defined as surpassing the measurement error threshold of 5° or 6° after orthotic treatment, varied from 1.8% to 91.7% across the studies. Ten studies defined the treatment failure, surgery, or surgery indication as Cobb angle progressing to a certain degree (e.g., 40°, 45°, or 50°) and reported failure/surgery/surgery indication rates ranging from 0.0% to 91.7% among different compliance level groups.
CONCLUSIONS: This review found that the actual compliance with orthotic treatment was generally lower than the prescribed wearing time and exhibited wide variation among different studies. The electronic compliance monitors show promise in regular orthotic treatment practice. More importantly, the group with higher and consistent compliance has significantly less curve progression and lower surgery or failure rate than the group with lower and inconsistent compliance. Further studies are proposed to investigate the minimal orthosis-wearing compliance in patients with AIS treated with different types of orthoses.
METHODS: Level III, Systematic Review. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the Boston brace and European braces using a standardised Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) inclusion criteria for brace treatment as well as consensus recommendations for treatment outcome.
METHODS: This was a systematic review that was carried out using MeSH terminology in our search protocol in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Clinicaltrials.gov and Web of Science database between 1976 and 29th of Jan 2023. All studies that were included in this review had applied fully/partially the SRS inclusion criteria for brace wear. Outcome measures were divided into primary and secondary outcome measures.
RESULTS: 3830 literatures were found in which 176 literatures were deemed relevant to the study once duplicates were removed and titles and abstracts were screened. Of these literatures, only 15 had fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were included in the study. 8 of the studies were Level IV studies, 5 were Level III studies and 2 studies were Level I studies (1 prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) and 1 Quasi-RCT). The percentage of patients who avoided surgery for European braces ranged from 88 to 100%, whereas for Boston brace ranged from 70 to 94%. When treatment success was assessed based on the final Cobb angle > 45°, approximately 15% of patients treated with European braces had treatment failure. In contrast, 20-63% of patients treated with Boston brace had curves > 45° at skeletal maturity. The BrAIST study used a cut-off point of 50° to define failure of treatment and the rate of treatment failure was 28%. Curve correction was not achieved in most patients (24-51% of patients) who were treated with the Chêneau brace and its derivatives. However, none of the patients treated with Boston brace achieved curve correction.
CONCLUSIONS: Boston brace and European braces were effective in the prevention of surgery. In addition, curve stabilisation was achieved in most studies. Limitation in current literature included lack of studies providing high level of evidence and lack of standardisation in terms of compliance to brace as well as multidisciplinary management of brace wear.

BACKGROUND: Orthosis (orthotic) fabrication is an essential part of the treatment plan for many upper extremity conditions.
OBJECTIVE: We aim to comprehensively identify the current body of evidence about the purpose, structure, scope, and application of available orthotic classification systems. Our secondary aim was to know if the current classification systems can be used as a decision guide for clinicians.
METHODS: A scoping review.
METHODS: A scoping review of research studies identified through data-based and gray literature was conducted to determine studies that addressed classification systems of the orthosis (orthotic) in the hand and upper limb. Two investigators screened study titles and abstracts and did the data extraction. To do a comprehensive review, all the hand therapy associations were contacted and asked to share their specific orthosis classification system. To answer our second aim, we discussed our findings with the experts in a panel.
RESULTS: Twelve different classification systems were identified, which were developed with different aims. Five classification systems classified orthosis based on their function (n = 5, 50%); one based on therapeutic goals and proposed a decision algorithm. Two of the proposed systems were aimed at helping in decision-making or offering an algorithm for therapists to help them choose the proper orthosis. The expert panel process identified that the current classification systems could not help clinicians select proper orthosis for their patients.
CONCLUSIONS: There are different classification systems which were developed with various aims. However, none of those can help clinicians make informed decisions about appropriate orthosis choices for their patients.