Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Foot orthotics associated with increased injury risk in runners

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by NewsBot, Feb 24, 2015.

  1. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.


    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    Injuries in Runners; A Systematic Review on Risk Factors and Sex Differences.
    van der Worp MP, ten Haaf DSM, van Cingel R, de Wijer A, Nijhuis-van der Sanden MWG, et al.
    PLoS ONE 10(2): e0114937. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0114937
  2. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    "confounding by indication"
  3. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    anyone got the full paper.. I could not find it and I shall be very interested to read it. I am presuming they draw their conclusion because orthoses have been used to treat an injured population? Sefl fulfilling prophesy?
  4. That was my 1st thoughts as well

    conclusion may as well been previously injuried running more likely to use foot orthotics
  5. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    It's open access - click on link
  6. toomoon

    toomoon Well-Known Member

    Must have just opened up.. would only show abstract yesterday.. thanks Griff
  7. BEN-HUR

    BEN-HUR Well-Known Member

    The [9] ref. paper below...

    The [47] ref. paper below...

    Appears to be pretty lame (pun intended) evidence (just on ref. [9] & [47] alone) to me on the stated case of orthotics (in relation to running injuries within the paper in question). I suppose my experience (& that of my patients) doesn't count does it?
  8. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    I agree Matthew. Very bold conclusions based on just 2 studies, neither of which were prospective in design (one was a survey!) and neither of which appeared to investigate orthoses as a risk factor for running injury as their priority!

    Just wait for the anti-orthoses brigade to happily throw this abstract around willy nilly now....
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2015
  9. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Easy to deal with; just ask them to look up:
    Blog post up later today about it
  10. Here you go, read between the lines in this paper which discusses this concept with regard to pharmacological studies, replace the drug with an orthoses and you'll get the point that Craig is making.

    Attached Files:

  11. evilgrin

    evilgrin Welcome New Poster

    It's considered mandatory in a lot of shoe stores now to package some kind of insert with EVERY shoe sale. I think the study should separate prescription orthotics, from store bought inserts.
  12. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    I don't think its mandatory, but its common retail practice to upsell every sale if you can. The two most recent editions of the running shoe trade magazine, Running insight, has some big features on "insoles" and upselling.
  13. qmartin

    qmartin Member

    Normal. If your prescribes for myopia sunglasses a Chinese bazaar ...
    Would have to analyze whether these are properly prescribed orthotics.

    This is crazy
  14. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    I still writing my blog post analyzing the paper, but will be writing to the editor asking that it be retracted:
    - there methods are not reproducible
    - too many high quality studies not included in the review
    - the main conclusion (ie orthotics risk) are not even supported by the two papers that they use to claim that

    At best, this was just sloppy. At worst, this was a deliberate attempt to mislead to promote an agenda.
  15. In what way?

    Which ones?

  16. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Inclusion and exclusion of criteria for what they decided to include or exclude - not enough detail to reproduce the exclusion of lots of papers.
    I also think they were very sloppy in their search process.
    I still working on a list, but look at the one that were included in these two studies: http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podiatry-forum/showthread.php?t=100560 - they were good enough quality to be included in these reviews, so why did they exclude them from the above study (either they were sloppy and did not find them or they excluded them (hence my comment on inclusion/exclusion criteria)
    They need to be held accountable for that epic fail. The peer reviewers also must have been asleep at the wheel.
  17. What journal was this published in?
  18. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Not sure what you referring two.
  19. The OP paper that said foot orthoses were associated with an increased risk, what journal? What's this PLoS one? Who they?
  20. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Plos One are a very prestigious high impact open access journal ... which is all the more surprising that this one slipped through the review process.

    They backed by the Public Library of Science:

    I just noticed this on their Wikipedia page: "The PLOS ONE online platform employs a "publish first, judge later" methodology, with post-publication user discussion and rating features" ... that is of concern and will comment on that in the blog post when ready!


    Redirect to:

    • From a page move: This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name.
  21. Yep, I'd already been there and seen that, which is why I asked.
  22. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Pedobarograph based prefabricated orthotics
    reduces self-reported minor injuries and improves
    comfort whilst running

    Volume 12 Issue 1 - 2020
    George Ampat et al
  23. Brian A. Rothbart

    Brian A. Rothbart Active Member

    This paper may encapsulate an issue that I feel has long been ignored:
    • All too often orthotics are prescribed without isolating the primary pathology.
    In my practice I have seen too many cases in which the prescribed orthotic have increased the patient's symptoms.

    Do you believe prescribing an antibiotic for a virus infection is a misfeasance? I do, and for the very same reason, prescribing an orthotic indiscriminately (not first isolating the primary pathology) is a maleficence.

    Possibly this paper circumscribes this issue?

Share This Page