Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozYDW5egrdc&feature=relmfu

Interesting cast production method from SS

 

Sweet Lord - postural analysis is a comparison of WB uncorrected vs WB corrected. When you have technology like that, who needs a clinician?

 

Robin I predicted this was where they would be headed, obviating the clinical exam, post to cast, final decisions on the device from the SS lab. How did I know this?

1. First there was the change of meaning of the acronym MASS from Subtalar Stabilization to Supination Stabilization.
2. Posture became their buzz word reflecting the chiropractic & physical therapy markets.
3. An ad that appeared in the California Chiropractic Assoc newsletter that simply stated "your cast is your prescription".

 

How does this change anything? The casting methods and materials are still the same. The only difference is how the lab receives the cast. Couldn't a practitioner send a cast to any lab without a clinical exam, as long as you know how to cast?

 

Very true MJJ. I think what Robin and I are getting at is the postural tool, what does it really tell you? Similar to Foot Levelers reliance on navicular travel and pronation as the sole criteria for medical necessity of orthotics.

I'm a big fan of technology and have used optical imaging to cast before. The resulting digital cast was then emailed to the lab, very efficient. The problem with some of these optical devices though is lighting and if they're proprietary to one lab. In this case it saves on postage and time which I don't have an issue with.

 

Structured light scanner. Ok, ignoring the marker placement error, what marking two points on the scans can basically give you is a straight line in 3-dimensional space. So, assuming that the marker placement is repeatable between scans (it won't be) what you'll get is the change in the arch point marker position between MASS position and relaxed weightbearing; similar to navicular drop and drift. Now, no-one to the best of my knowledge, has demonstrated what that change in position means clinically, since navicular drop and drift have not been measured from a MASS position within the literature. Nor has this been used within predictive models of pathology. These measures certainly don't allow you to determine the change in force within the plantar fascia, as the screen shots within the video appear to suggest- that's just marketing nonsense unless someone has built a predictive model by physically measuring all the variables- specifically placing strain gauges within the plantar fascia of a large sample and measuring change in fascial tension between the two positions, i.e. mass and relaxed stance- I very much doubt that this has been done here. Although I suspect Ed will claim that it has and when asked he'll say it's proprietary information. And I?... Still won't believe him.

Look at it, say what it is.... it' a cheap structured light scanner.