Patent for Foot Orthotic designed via 3d Actuators

NewsBot · Nov 4, 2017

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

Systems and methods are disclosed for fitting a subject by generating one or more 3D deformable models for an anatomical portion; capturing images of a user anatomical portion and a reference object using a mobile camera; generating an updated model of the user anatomical portion by selecting a closest 3D deformable model to the user anatomical portion and matching points on the closest 3D deformable model to one or more predetermined points on the user anatomical portion; and selecting a best-fit product from a plurality of product variations based on the 3D model.
Click to expand...

Also includes this on supination resistance etc

The process may further include one or more of a skeletal integrity test, a fascial chord tension test, an ankle joint stiffness-lunge test, a principal activity velocity test, a sagittal plane morphology test, and a hamstring stiffness test. More explanation of the various tests is as follows:

(a) Supination Resistance Test—This is the amount of force required to resupinate the foot. With the patient standing in a relaxed weight bearing position, the force is graded on various levels and recorded from very low to very high. This index reveals where the centre of pressure is to be applied to the foot by the orthotic device, whether towards the back or the front. Foot integrity is also estimated from the amount of change in arch amplitude observed when the foot goes from a non-weight bearing position to a weight bearing. The change in arch amplitude may be measured within a range of five increments categorized from very low to very high; if the amplitude changes by two increments, the foot is classified as a foot with poor integrity, whereas if the change is just one increment the foot would be classified as one with good integrity. If there is no change then the integrity measure is scored as excellent. These integrity measures give further information for application of the design parameters that relates to the amount of rear foot to fore foot support.

(b) Windlass mechanism test—Jack's Test and Fascial Chord Tension Test. The force required to lift the hallux when the patient's foot is in a full weight bearing position is determined by The Jacks Test. When the hallux is lifted, the foot automatically begins to resupinate. The force to initiate the foot resupination is graded on three levels form low to high. This index provides additional information as to the placement of the centre pressure in the orthotic design. Fascial Chord Tension Test is as follows. With the foot non-weight bearing, the first metatarsal is dorsi-flexed and the prominence of the fascial chord is recorded. The prominence of the fascial chord is graded from low to high. This parameter is important as this allows the design to be modified to accommodate the fascial chord by way of a fascial groove. It is important to be able to adjust the design this way to help protect and facilitate the windlass effect. The orthotic design may require further adjustment including wedging in the rear foot to help push the chord out of the way.

(c) Sagittal plane morphology test. This categorizes the foot in terms of the gradient, the anterior calcaneal surface and the foot apex position. The gradient is evaluated as low, medium, or high. The foot apex position when combined with the gradient is categorized as rear, central, or forward, providing key information on the amount of soft tissue that surrounds the anterior heel area and can affect the amount of rear foot orthotic contour applied in the design.

(d) Hamstrings tension test. This is a test indicating the amount of tension in the hamstrings so as to determine the possible compensatory impact on the ankle joint in the close kinetic chain. Hamstring tension is graded on three levels low, medium and high. When the tension is categorized as high changes are made to the design so as to facilitate sagittal plane function.

(e) Lunge test. Failure in this test implies that greater ankle joint facilitation must be provided for in the design. The design will reflect the increased force needed to establish foot resupination.

(f) Principal activity velocity test. The principle activity velocity is defined as the level of activity the device is being designed for whether that is predominantly standing or moderate walking or running. The activity is graded on three levels from low to high. This is recorded as an index. When applied to the design it influences whether there is a need to more closely contour to the foot type or wedge more the rear foot area of the orthotic. The greater the velocity the greater the force of correction required and the further back the device apex should be.
Click to expand...

Patent attached

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Attached Files:

US20170287212A1.pdf

orthotic.JPG

Foot Orthotic Patent: "of differing durometer adapted to guide the foot"

Patent granted for energy return foot orthotic

Patent granted for instrumented foot orthotic

Patent granted for 3D printing of foot orthotics in the clinic

Barefoot orthotic patent

Patent granted for a "foot orthotic"!

Patent granted for foot orthotic with a "heel"

Share This Page