Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

CME Article

Shank-to-Vertical Angle in Ankle-Foot Orthoses: A Comparison of Static and Dynamic Assessment in a Series of Cases

Eddison, Nicola MSc; Healy, Aoife PhD; Needham, Robert MSc; Chockalingam, Nachiappan PhD

Author Information
Journal of Prosthetics and Orthotics: October 2017 - Volume 29 - Issue 4 - p 161-167
doi: 10.1097/JPO.0000000000000141
  • Free
  • Take the CME Test

Abstract

Ankle-foot orthoses (AFOs) are commonly prescribed to patients in an attempt to normalize joint kinetics and kinematics during gait. It is clear from the available literature that different designs of AFOs can significantly affect the kinetics and kinematics of gait.1–30 Patients with pathological gait have abnormal lower-limb kinematics, particularly at the shank segment (see Winters et al.31 and Rodda et al.32 for classification of gait in cerebral palsy, and Owen33,37,42,43,46 for details on abnormal shank kinematics). Attempting to normalize the shank kinematics offers a greater chance of optimum thigh and trunk kinematics and knee and hip kinetics.33,34 Tuning the AFO and the footwear combination (AFO-FC) has been demonstrated to optimize the ground reaction force (GRF) during gait33–37 and has been recognized as an essential aspect of clinical practice.37–43 Ankle-foot orthoses tuning can be defined as the process whereby fine adjustments are made to the design of the AFO-FC to optimize its performance during gait. The term biomechanical optimization is used to encompass the whole process of designing, aligning, and tuning the AFO-FC.37,43,47

THE SHANK-TO-VERTICAL ANGLE

The shank-to-vertical angle (SVA) can be described as the angle of the shank relative to the vertical, measured in the sagittal plane. The SVA is described as inclined if the shank is inclined forward from the vertical and reclined if it is reclined backward from the vertical. It is described in degrees, with vertical being 0°. The line in the sagittal plane of the anterior aspect of the tibia is used to represent the line of the shank.37,43,47 Owen37,43,47 indicated that anthropometric measures dictate that an SVA between 10° and 12° inclined from the vertical brings the knee joint center over the middle of the foot during mid-stance in normal subjects. There is only a small range of SVA where it is possible to incline the thigh, maintain a vertical trunk, and balance. It is 7° to 15° inclined, 10° to 12° being the optimum position.36,43,47

An SVA of 10° to 12° at mid-stance is important for the following reasons37:

  1. It contributes to stability in stance by placing the knee joint center over the center of the foot, which is creating a stable distal support mechanism. This creates a stable distal support mechanism in the form of a triangle.
  2. It facilitates ballistic movement of the thigh, pelvis, and trunk. Soleus is restraining the forward movement of the shank, and momentum carries the thigh, pelvis, and trunk forward to extend the knee.
  3. It dictates thigh, pelvis, trunk, and head kinematics.
  4. It facilitates appropriate GRF alignment to the knee and hip and switching of moments from flexion to extension moments at the knee and hip.
  5. It may contribute to conservation of energy.

Pratt et al.44 investigated the SVA and the moment arm at the knee joint on 11 healthy children in an attempt to establish a baseline for AFO-FC tuning. The research reported a mean SVA at temporal mid-stance (TMST) of 11.4° ± 3.4° in the barefoot condition and 10.5° ± 3.6° in the shod condition, thus providing support for Owen's37,43,47 indication of the position of the SVA during mid-stance. More recently, Kerkum et al.48 looked at the SVA as a parameter to evaluate tuning of AFOs; their study on adults demonstrated that the SVA is responsive to changes in AFO-FC heel height, which resulted in an increase in lower-limb joint flexion angles and net internal extension moments. This is in line with findings from other studies.34,35,49 However, it is assumed that the static SVA of the AFOFC will closely mimic the dynamic SVA at TMST, although there is no evidence of this in the current literature.

The angle of the ankle in the AFO (AAAFO) and the pitch of the heel sole differential (HSD) will determine the SVA. Detailed information on the tuning process has previously been described.33,37,43,46,47 Various authors have used different terms to describe the angle between the shank of the tibia and the floor. Owen37,43,46,50 used shank angle to floor (SAF); Pratt et al.44 used shank and the vertical angle (SAV); and Hullin et al.45 used the term foot-shank angle, all of which are synonymous with SVA.37

MEASURING THE SVA OF THE AFO-FC

Owen37,43,46 advocates measuring the SVA of the AFO-FC with the subject standing on a force plate with the AFO-FC sagittal to the camera with equal weight between the heel and the toe, ensuring the GRF is in the middle of the foot. A picture is then printed and, using a goniometer, the angle between the shank and the vertical is measured; this is considered the angle of the SVA of the AFO-FC. It is assumed that the SVA of the AFO-FC measured while the subject is static will positively affect the SVA at TMST during the gait cycle; however, there is no evidence in the literature to suggest whether this is an accurate method of determining the effect of the SVA at TMST.

The aim of the SVA is to positively influence the kinetics and kinematics during gait. Therefore, it is imperative that the SVA of the AFO-FC measured statically normalizes the SVA measured dynamically at TMST. Given that this is an accepted clinical practice, the purpose of this study is to compare the measurement of the SVA of the AFO-FC statically with the measurement of the SVA dynamically at TMST in a series of cases.

METHOD

PARTICIPANTS

Four children aged between 7 and 11 years with a diagnosis of cerebral palsy, 1 with hemiplegia and 3 with diplegia, participants with a gross motor functional classification scale (GMFCS) of 2, and all of whom were long-term AFO users participated in this study (see Table 1 for anthropometric data of the participants).

Table 1
Table 1:
Anthropometric data

ETHICAL APPROVAL

This study was granted ethical approval by the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) Ethics Committee West Midlands South Birmingham (reference number 12/WM/0378). All participants provided full informed oral and written consent before inclusion in the study.

PROCEDURE

Each subject was assessed by an experienced orthotist and prescribed with a bespoke solid polypropylene AFO. The AFOs (see Figure 1 and 1A) used in this study were deemed appropriate for each subject on an individual basis and ensured there was no movement of the AFO in terms of deformation during stance phase (see Table 2 for AFO design details).

Figure 1
Figure 1:
A and B, Illustrative examples of one subject's AFO.
Table 2
Table 2:
AFO design for each participant

The trimlines at the ankle finished anterior to the malleolus. The height of each AFO finished 30 mm below the fibula head. All the footplates were full length. The AAAFO was determined by an examination of the passive length of gastrocnemius with the knee extended to ensure that the resulting AFO captured the length of gastrocnemius. Where the AAAFO was in plantarflexion, a buildup was added to the AFO to achieve a vertical bench alignment, shank angle to bench (SAB). All subjects were issued with the same over-splint footwear (see Figure 2) in either black or white (Blacky style manufactured by Salts Techstep, United Kingdom).

Figure 2
Figure 2:
Example of over-splint footwear (Blacky style manufactured by Salts Techstep, United Kingdom).

Retroreflective markers were placed on each subject's lower limbs to mark the tibial tuberosity; fibula head; lateral knee joint; distal tibia; calcaneus; lateral malleolus; first, second, and fifth metatarsophalangeal joint; and the distal first phalangeal to allow identification of gait events (see Figure 3A, B).

Figure 3
Figure 3:
A, Over-splint footwear with temporary wedges. B, Tuned AFO-FC with permanent modifications to the sole unit.

Each participant's AFO-FC was tuned by an experienced orthotist using video equipment with GRF overlay to establish the optimum SVA of the AFO-FC. The tuning process followed Owen's algorithm.46 Temporary wedges and, where necessary, point loading rockers (PLRs) were added to the sole of the footwear via masking tape (see Figure 3) until the optimum SVA of the AFO-FC was determined. Once the SVA of the AFO-FC was determined, the footwear was then sent for permanent modification. The participants were called back to the laboratory 3 weeks after receiving their permanently modified footwear (to allow each participant to get used to walking in their tuned AFO-FC before testing) to undergo testing for this study.

MEASUREMENTS

Each participant was asked to stand on the force plate in the tuned AFO-FC with the AFO-FC sagittal to the video camera, ensuring the GRF point of application was in the middle of the foot (see Figure 4). The image was recorded and uploaded to video analysis software (Kinovea 0.8.15) to enable the angle of the SVA of the AFO-FC to be measured using Owen's method.43 This determined the static SVA angle.

Figure 4
Figure 4:
Illustration of measurement where a participant stood on the force plate in AFO-FC with the visible GRF.

On the same day, each participant was then asked to walk 4-minute trials for three times on a 32-m walkway in the gait laboratory, allowing kinetics and kinematics to be captured using force plates and 18-camera optoelectronic motion analysis system (Vicon, Oxford, United Kingdom) for a wider study. The gait analysis protocol included the use of two high-speed video cameras, one placed in the frontal plane and the other in the sagittal plane. The cameras enabled two-dimensional analysis of gait and posture in addition to sophisticated three-dimensional analysis, which is beyond the scope of this manuscript.

Temporal mid-stance was identified, which was described by Gibson et al.51 as occurring at 30% of the gait cycle. During TMST, the pelvis, the trunk, and the head are directly over the foot and the GRF seems to be vertical. The knee of the swing limb can just be seen anterior to the stance limb and the heel of the swing limb can be seen posterior to the stance limb.42 The corresponding frame of video was identified and uploaded onto the 2D analysis software, so the SVA angle could be measured using Owen's method.37,43,46

RESULTS

The results of the SVA of the AFO-FC during quiet standing and during five walking trials were measured for each participant (see Table 3). The SVA of the AFO-FC measured while the subject was static correlated with the SVA measured at TMST to within 0.25° to 0.4° (see Figure 5 for representative illustration of the static measurement and the corresponding dynamic measurement for the same participant).

Table 3
Table 3:
Static and dynamic SVA angles
Figure 5
Figure 5:
Representative static SVA and SVA at mid-stance for various participants.

DISCUSSION

The present study demonstrates that the SVA of the AFO-FC measured statically (ISO defines static alignment as “static alignment: process whereby the bench alignment is refined while the prosthesis or orthosis is being worn by the stationary patient”52) correlates to the SVA measured at TMST during gait (ISO defines dynamic alignment as the “process whereby the alignment of the prosthesis or orthosis is optimized by using observations of the movement pattern of the patient”52). While measuring the SVA of the AFO-FC in relaxed stance, each subject placed both lower limbs on the foot plate. This method was chosen as opposed to only one foot on the foot plate to reduce the risk of distorting the subject's normal relaxed stance position and to ensure that the weight was distributed evenly between both lower limbs.

All four subjects' SVA of the AFO-FC measurements statically correlated to the dynamic SVA measurement to within 0.4° to 0.6°. The results of this study support Owen's method42,43 of measuring the SVA. The aim of this study was to measure the SVA in static and compare it with the SVA dynamically at TMST; in doing so, it is important to ensure ecological validity.

The authors are aware that not all clinicians have access to three-dimensional gait analysis equipment. The study of Eddison et al.53 on the common clinical practice of AFO-FC tuning in the United Kingdom reported that 34% of respondents reported they do not tune the AFO-FCs of their patients because they do not have access to three-dimensional gait analysis and a further 27% reporting that the process is too time-consuming. Thus, the method used in this study of uploading an image and using video analysis software to determine the SVA angle was purposely chosen to ensure that the method is clinically applicable and accessible to all clinicians. It is also important to note that the static SVA of the AFO-FC can also be measured using a simple goniometer.

Currently, there is no other study in the literature that has measured the SVA at mid-stance and compared it with the SVA of the AFO-FC measured statically. Although we have not subjected the data to any detailed statistical tests due to low participant numbers, the results pave the way to design further structured studies with accepted statistical power. In addition, reported values will also inform future studies that investigate the material properties for AFOs and the combination of AFOs and footwear.

As stated, the aim was to ensure that the method used remained clinically applicable; however, there is a limitation with using video analysis software, as most of the commercially available ones measure the angle to the nearest whole degree. Another limitation of the study was the ability to ensure that the subject was in the true sagittal plane to the camera during the static SVA of the AFO-FC measurement, but during gait, it is not possible to ensure that a child with pathological gait remains in the true sagittal plane at the point the child passes the video camera.

Although the case series analysis shows clinical applicability, the robustness of this validity has to be established with larger participant groups. It might be possible in a research setting to overcome the limitations posed by video analysis by introducing other technologies such as inertial motion sensor-based systems.

CONCLUSIONS

This study seems to indicate that measuring the SVA of the AFO-FC statically is an accurate way of determining the SVA at TMST during gait.

REFERENCES

1. Brunner R, Meier G, Ruepp T. Comparison of a stiff and a spring-type ankle-foot orthosis to improve gait in spastic hemiplegic children. J Pediatr Orthop 1998;18(6):719–726.
2. Buckon CE, Sienko TS, Jakobson-Huston S, et al. Comparison of three ankle-foot orthosis configurations for children with spastic hemiplegia. Dev Med Child Neurol 2001;43:371–378.
3. Huenaerts C, Desloovere K, Molenaers G, et al. The effects of ankle-foot orthoses on the gait of children with cerebral palsy after treatment with botulinum toxin a: effects on temporal-spatial parameters and kinematics and kinetics of the proximal joints. Gait Posture 2004;20(Suppl 1):s63.
4. Molenaers G, Desloovere K, Van Campenhout A, et al. Effect of ankle foot orthoses on 3D trunk and pelvic motion during gait in children with CP. Gait Posture 2006;24(Suppl 2):S174–S175.
5. Romkes J, Hell AK, Brunner R. Changes in muscle activity in children with hemiplegic cerebral palsy while walking with and without ankle-foot orthoses. Gait Posture 2006;24(4):467–474.
6. Carlson WE, Vaughan CL, Damiano DL, et al. Orthotic management of gait in spastic diplegia. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 1997;76(3):219–225.
7. Abel MF, Juhl GA, Vaughan CL, et al. Gait assessment of fixed ankle-foot orthoses in children with spastic diplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1998;79(2):126–133.
8. Dursun E, Dursun N, Alican D. Ankle-foot orthoses: effect on gait in children with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24(7):345–347.
9. Lam WK, Leong JC, Li YH, et al. Biomechanical and electromyographic evaluation of ankle foot orthosis and dynamic ankle foot orthosis in spastic cerebral palsy. Gait Posture 2005;22(3):189–197.
10. Balaban B, Yasar E, Dal U, et al. The effect of hinged ankle-foot orthosis on gait and energy expenditure in spastic hemiplegic cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil 2007;29(2):139–144.
11. Desloovere K, Huenaerts C, Molenaers G, et al. Effects of ankle foot orthoses on the gait of cerebral palsy children. Gait Posture 1999;10(1):89–89.
12. White H, Jenkins J, Neace WP, et al. Clinically prescribed orthoses demonstrate an increase in velocity of gait in children with cerebral palsy: a retrospective study. Dev Med Child Neurol 2002;44(4):227–232.
13. Van Rooijen D, De Groot J, Harlaar J, et al. The effect of fixed ankle-foot orthoses on spatio-temporal parameters, kinematics and muscle activity in children with spastic diplegia. Gait Posture 2006;24(Suppl 2):S149–S150.
14. Ounpuu S, Bell KJ, Davis RB, et al. An evaluation of the posterior leaf spring orthosis using joint kinematics and kinetics. J Pediatr Orthop 1996;16(3):378–384.
15. Chambers C. Dynamic versus standard AFOs: a comparison of gait parameters. Gait Posture 1999;9:105–106.
16. Rethlefsen S, Kay R, Dennis S, et al. The effects of fixed and articulated ankle-foot orthoses on gait patterns in subjects with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop 1999;19(4):470–474.
17. Crenshaw S, Herzog R, Castagno P, et al. The efficacy of tone-reducing features in orthotics on the gait of children with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop 2000;20(2):210–216.
18. Lucareli PR, Lima Mde O, Lucarelli JG, et al. Changes in joint kinematics in children with cerebral palsy while walking with and without a floor reaction ankle-foot orthosis. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2007;62(1):63–68.
19. Lampe R, Mitternacht J, Schrödl S, et al. Influence of orthopaedic-technical aid on the kinematics and kinetics of the knee joint of patients with neuro-orthopaedic diseases. Brain Dev 2004;26(4):219–226.
20. Wesdock KA, Edge AM. Effects of wedged shoes and ankle-foot orthoses on standing balance and knee extension in children with cerebral palsy who crouch. Pediatr Phys Ther 2003;15(4):221–231.
21. Mossberg KA, Linton KA, Friske K. Ankle-foot orthoses: effect on energy expenditure of gait in spastic diplegic children. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1990;71(7):490–494.
22. Maltais D, Bar-Or O, Galea V, et al. Use of orthoses lowers the O(2) cost of walking in children with spastic cerebral palsy. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001;33(2):320–325.
23. Churchill AJ, Halligan PW, Wade DT. Relative contribution of footwear to the efficacy of ankle-foot orthoses. Clin Rehabil 2003;17(5):553–557.
24. Radtka SA, Skinner SR, Dixon DM, et al. A comparison of gait with solid, dynamic, and no ankle-foot orthoses in children with spastic cerebral palsy. Phys Ther 1997;77(4):395–409.
25. Radtka SA, Skinner SR, Johanson ME. A comparison of gait with solid and hinged ankle-foot orthoses in children with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy. Gait Posture 2005;21(3):303–310.
26. Thompson NS, Taylor TC, McCarthy KR, et al. Effect of a rigid ankle-foot orthosis on hamstring length in children with hemiplegia. Dev Med Child Neurol 2002;44(1):51–57.
27. Buckon CE, Thomas SS, Jakobson-Huston S, et al. Comparison of three ankle-foot orthosis configurations for children with spastic diplegia. Dev Med Child Neurol 2004;46(9):590–598.
28. Smiley SJ, Jacobsen FS, Mielke C, et al. A comparison of the effects of solid, articulated, and posterior leaf-spring ankle-foot orthoses and shoes alone on gait and energy expenditure in children with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy. Orthopedics 2002;25(4):411–415.
29. Van De Walle P. Do AFOs improve the gait efficiency in children with CP? Gait Posture 2005;22(Suppl 1):s2.
30. Waters RL, Mulroy S. The energy expenditure of normal and pathologic gait. Gait Posture 1999;9:207–231.
31. Winters TF Jr, Gage JR, Hicks R. Gait patterns in spastic hemiplegia in children and young adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987;69:437–441.
32. Rodda JM, Graham HK, Carson L, et al. Sagittal gait patterns in spastic diplegia. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004;86:251–258.
33. Owen E. Tuning of ankle foot orthosis footwear combinations for children with cerebral palsy, spina bifida and other conditions. In: Proceedings of the European Society of Movement Analysis in Adults and Children (ESMAC) Seminars. Warsaw, Poland: 2004.
34. Jagadamma KC, Coutts FJ, Mercer TH, et al. Effects of tuning of ankle foot orthoses-footwear combination using wedges on stance phase knee hyperextension in children with cerebral palsy—preliminary results. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2009;4(6):406–413.
35. Jagadamma KC, Coutts FJ, Mercer TH, et al. Optimising the effects of rigid ankle foot orthoses on the gait of children with cerebral palsy (CP)—an exploratory trial. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2014.
36. Meadows CB. The influence of polypropylene ankle-foot orthoses on the gait of cerebral palsied children. University of Strathclyde, Bioengineering Unit; 1984.
37. Owen E. The importance of being earnest about shank and thigh kinematics especially when using ankle-foot orthoses. Prosthet Orthot Int 2010;34:254–269.
38. Ridgewell E, Gibson S, Nguyen T, Walker L. The biomechanical and functional effects of ankle foot orthosis shank-to-vertical angle in children with cerebral palsy: a pilot study. 13th International Society of Prosthetics.
39. Bowers R, Ross K. A review of the effectiveness of lower limb orthoses used in cerebral palsy. In: Morris C, Condie D, (Eds.) Recent Developments in Healthcare for Cerebral Palsy: Implications and Opportunities for Orthotics. Copenhagen: International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics; 2009:235–297.
40. Owen E, Bowers RJ, Meadows CB, eds. Tuning of AFO-footwear combinations for neurological disorders. In: Symposium of the 11th World Congress of the International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics (Invited Presentation). Hong Kong, 1–6 August 2004. ISPO.
41. Bowers R, Ross K. Development of a best practice statement on the use of ankle-foot orthoses following stroke in Scotland. Prosthet Orthot Int 2010;34(3):245–253.
42. Owen E. Paediatric Gait Analysis and Orthotic Management with AFO Footwear Combinations. Course Manual 2012 (personal communication 16 April 2012).
43. Owen E. Shank Angle to Floor Measures and Tuning of Ankle Foot Orthosis Footwear Combinations for Children with Cerebral Palsy, Spina Bifida and Other Conditions. United Kingdom: MSc Thesis, University of Strathclyde; 2004.
44. Pratt E, Durham S, Ewins D. Normal databases for orthotic tuning in children. Gait Posture 2007;26S:S92.
45. Hullin MG, Robb JE, Loudon IR. Ankle-foot orthosis function in low level myelomeningocele. J Pediatr Orthop 1992;12(4):518–521.
46. Owen E. A clinical algorithm for the design and tuning of ankle-foot orthosis footwear combinations (AFOFCs) based on shank kinematics. Gait Posture 2005;22S:S36–S37.
47. Eddison N, Chockalingam N. The effect of tuning ankle foot orthoses-footwear combination on the gait parameters of children with cerebral palsy. Prosthet Orthot Int 2013;37(2):95–107.
48. Kerkum YL, Houdijk H, Brehm MA, et al. The shank-to-vertical-angle as a parameter to evaluate tuning of Ankle-Foot Orthoses. Gait Posture 2015;42(3):269–274.
49. Jagadamma KC, Owen E, Coutts FJ, et al. The effects of tuning an ankle-foot orthosis footwear combination on kinematics and kinetics of the knee joint of an adult with hemiplegia. Prosthet Orthot Int 2010;34(3):270–276.
50. Owen E. Shank angle to floor measures of tuned ‘ankle-foot orthosis footwear combinations’ used with children with cerebral palsy, spina bifida and other conditions. Gait Posture 2002;16(Suppl 1):S132–S133.
51. Gibson T, Jeffery RS, Bakheit AM. Comparison of three definitions of the mid-stance and mid-swing events of the gait cycle in children. Disabil Rehabil 2006;28(10):625–628.
52. ISO 8549–1 (1989) Alignment 2.3.12. Available at: https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:8549:-1:ed-1:v1:en.
53. Eddison N, Chockalingam N, Osborne S. Ankle foot orthosis-footwear combination tuning: an investigation into common clinical practice in the United Kingdom. Prosthet Orthot Int 2015;39(2):126–133.
Keywords:

orthotic devices; AFO tuning; ankle-foot orthoses; cerebral palsy; gait; shank-to-vertical angle

Copyright © 2017 American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists