Anthropometric studies of the foot for prefab designs

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

Greetings all
Can anyone help me find any anthropometric studies of the foot especially looking at foot length and the plantar fascia.
I am trying to work out how prefab manufactures produce their sizes, how they know where to place their cut outs and modifications. It must be based on some research.
I have found a few journal papers which describe the different width and depth of the individual bands but none on the length variations.

It would be great if anyone could help

Cheers
Paul
(P.S came up with some interesting results in the search engines. All the boys out there you can sleep easy apparently there is no correlation)

 

There are no studies that I know of. Many of the brands I am familar with base the shape on positive model modification from custom made production.

We have tested a number of prefabs which claim to have design features that are claimed to help windlass function/plantar fasica. The Interpod plastic model has a plantar fascia groove, that does help about a third of those we tested it in (IMHO, the groove was in the wrong place). The Vasyli "first metatarsal plantarflexor to enhance windlass function" dosen't make any difference.

 

Thanks Craig
At least I can now stop searching

Paul

 

Paul,

If you accept (in a low level debate) that a Preform is a "compromise" against a good custom device then the issue is put into perspective.

The design features of all Preforms are dependent on the manufacturing process. It costs a lot of money to lay down moulds so the choice is going to be limited by that cost. In most cases the Average foot size and shape is taken.

The problem comes when you try to "build in" additions like met pads, first ray cut-outs or as Craig says the Plantar Fascial Groove. With the Interpod range the groove is in the approximate best place - taken from their experience running a casting lab - but if Craig says it will only benefit a third of users then the incidental Product benefit of the groove is to strengthen the arch (O&P Technicians do it with AFOs by moulding over a piece of electrical flex to give greater strength).

In Germany where the Orthopaedie Schuh industry is (or was) amply funded by the insurance industry, the Suppliers catalogues like Globus, Schein, Kramer, etc had literally thousands of choices of insoles, Wide, Normal, Narrow, Full Length with different top covers, different shape of pads all of which could be ordered as a "Preform". I first saw those catalogues 15 years ago and they are now a fraction of the size due to product rationalisation because of financial pressures on the industry.

An Orthotist called Steve Osborne from Sheffield presented a paper recently on his experiences with CADCAM Technology. His team had done many thousand of CADCAM insoles - taken from Impression Boxes and slipper casts - he has built up a library of the images taken and is currently looking at how best to utilise the information, his efforts may well go into Orthopaedic shoe design.

We are talking specifically about Preform insoles but it has only been recently that shoe manufacturers have been looking at the shape and function of the foot and only then when they realised that that there was marketing mileage in it. If the big boy shoe manufacturers start using computer sizing equipment - as is already happening - they could capture a lot of data and in a few years simply press a button and have the ultimate shoe.

Cheers

Jamie