Treating flexible flat feet in children

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.

Efficacy of Functional Re-Education as a Treatment for Infantile Flexible Flatfoot: Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: Flexible pediatric flatfoot is an anatomical presentation of the foot that is common in children, and its functional impact raises long-term uncertainty. Functional re-education includes strengthening and stretching exercises for the intrinsic and extrinsic musculature of the foot, proposed as an effective conservative treatment. However, to date, there is no systematic review examining its effectiveness in the pediatric population. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of functional re-education as a conservative treatment for flexible pediatric flatfoot, determining which exercises are most effective. Methods: A search (PROSPERO: CRD42023391030) was conducted across six databases, resulting in an initial total of 327 studies. Of these, 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the inclusion criteria, resulting in a sample of 419 children aged 6 to 14 years with a diagnosis of flexible flatfoot. The evaluated studies present variations in diagnostic criteria, types of exercises, and treatment duration. Results: The results indicate that functional re-education is effective in improving the symptomatology and functionality of the foot in children. In particular, exercises targeting the intrinsic musculature proved to be among the most effective treatments, improving the structural development of the medial longitudinal arch. The reviewed literature recommends a minimum treatment duration of eight weeks. Conclusions: Functional re-education represents an effective conservative treatment option for flexible flatfoot in children, positioning it as the treatment of choice for this condition.

 

From many of the same group as were involved in the 1st paper mentioned in this thread, came the paper mentioned below. It would appear orthotics do have a role to play in helping treat flexible flat feet in children but perhaps not as big a role as strengthening of the plantar intrinsics. Best of all seems to be combining strengthening and orthotics. My observation is that some older foot health care professionals seem to persist with orthotics only when treating FFF in children .

Efficacy of Plantar Orthoses in Paediatric Flexible Flatfoot: A Five-Year Systematic Review

2023
Paediatric flexible flatfoot (PFF) is a very common condition and a common concern among parents and various healthcare professionals. There is a multitude of conservative and surgical treatments, with foot orthoses (FO) being the first line of treatment due to their lack of contraindications and because the active participation of the child is not required, although the evidence supporting them is weak. It is not clear what the effect of FO is, nor when it is advisable to recommend them. PFF, if left untreated or uncorrected, could eventually cause problems in the foot itself or adjacent structures. It was necessary to update the existing information on the efficacy of FO as a conservative treatment for the reduction in signs and symptoms in patients with PFF, to know the best type of FO and the minimum time of use and to identify the diagnostic techniques most commonly used for PFF and the definition of PFF. A systematic review was carried out in the databases PubMed, EBSCO, Web of Science, Cochrane, SCOPUS and PEDro using the following strategy: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) on child patients with PFF, compared to those treated with FO or not being treated, assessing the improvement of signs and symptoms of PFF. Studies in which subjects had neurological or systemic disease or had undergone surgery were excluded. Two of the authors independently assessed study quality. PRISMA guidelines were followed, and the systematic review was registered in PROSPERO: CRD42021240163. Of the 237 initial studies considered, 7 RCTs and CCTs published between 2017 and 2022 met the inclusion criteria, representing 679 participants with PFF aged 3–14 years. The interventions of the included studies differed in diagnostic criteria, types of FO and duration of treatment, among others. All articles conclude that FO are beneficial, although the results must be taken with caution due to the risk of bias of the included articles. There is evidence for the efficacy of FO as a treatment for PFF signs and symptoms. There is no treatment algorithm. There is no clear definition for PFF. There is no ideal type of FO, although all have in common the incorporation of a large internal longitudinal arch.