Search

Background: In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, populations were advised to remain at home to control viral spread. Government-mandated restrictions on free movement affected individuals' engagement with physical activity, with reported increases leading to biopsychosocial health benefits and conversely increased sedentary behaviour leading to poorer health. Good foot health is key to enabling physical activity and maximal participation in activities of occupation and daily living., Methods: A population-based cross-sectional study was performed, using a web-based platform. Quantitative and qualitative data were captured through responses to closed and open survey questions. Anybody with a foot health condition was eligible to participate in the online survey. Links were sent through professional networks, support groups and charities, using a snowball strategy to maximise participation., Results: Two hundred fifty-five respondents completed the survey. Most (n = 193, 75.69%) reported an ongoing foot pain or problem that had been present for 4 weeks or longer, whilst 49 respondents (19.22%) noted a new pain or problem. Pain was the most frequently reported symptom (n = 139, 54.51%), whilst change in appearance of the foot was also commonly reported (n = 122, 47.84%), often alongside the observable presence of swelling. Musculoskeletal foot symptoms were frequently reported (n = 123, 48%), and were significantly associated with reported reduced physical activity (X 2  = 6.61, p = 0.010). Following qualitative analysis five themes and 11 subthemes emerged, informed by 49 independent codes. A central theme of lockdown disrupting support networks, both formal (healthcare providers) and informal (friends or family members) emerged. The 5 sub-themes were: 1. foot pain is a constant companion, 2. self-care, 3. 'cope or crumble' scenarios, 4. future intent to access healthcare and 5. reduced ability to undertake physical activity., Conclusions: Pain was the most frequently reported foot problem during COVID-19 lockdown restriction. Lockdown restrictions disrupted support networks integral to maintaining foot health. Poor foot health impacted people's ability to remain physically active. Complaints previously considered relatively 'minor' such as support for skin and nail care, were found to be exacerbated by restricted support networks, leading to greater negative impact.

Background: The prevalence of foot osteoarthritis (OA) is much less understood than hip, knee and hand OA. The foot is anatomically complex and different researchers have investigated different joints with lack of methodological standardisation across studies. The La Trobe Foot Atlas (LFA) is the first to address these issues in providing quantitative assessment of radiographic foot OA, but has not been tested externally. The aim of this study was to evaluate three different interpretive approaches to using the LFA for grading OA when scoring is difficult due to indistinct views of interosseous space and joint contour., Methods: Foot radiographs of all remaining participants ( n  = 218) assessed in the Chingford Women Study 23 year visit (mean (SD) for age: 75.5 years (5.1)) were scored using the LFA defined protocol (Technique 1). Two revised scoring strategies were applied to the radiographs in addition to the standard LFA analyses. Technique 2 categorised joints that were difficult to grade as 'missing'. Technique 3 included joints that were difficult to grade as an over estimated score. Radiographic OA prevalence was defined for the foot both collectively and separately for individual joints., Results: When radiographs were scored using the LFA (Technique 1), radiographic foot OA was present in 89.9%. For Technique 2 the presence of radiographic foot OA was 83.5% and for Technique 3 it was 97.2%. At the individual joint level, using Technique 1, the presence of radiographic foot OA was higher with a wider range (18.3-74.3%) than Technique 2 (17.9-46.3%) and lower with a wider range (18.3-74.3%) than Technique 3 (39.9-79.4%)., Conclusion: The three different ways of interpreting the LFA scoring system when grading of individual joints is technically difficult and result in very different estimates of foot OA prevalence at both the individual joint and global foot level. Agreement on the best strategy is required to improve comparability between studies.

Objective: To determine the prevalence and natural history of foot-related disability in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). A secondary aim was to identify explanatory variables, including forefoot bursae, that are either associated with or predictive of disabling foot complications in patients with RA., Methods: A longitudinal prospective cohort study recruited patients with RA from a rheumatology outpatient clinic. Data were collected at baseline (n = 149) and 1-year (n = 120) and 3-year followup (n = 60). Patient-reported disabling foot complications were evaluated using the subscales of the Foot Impairment Score (FIS): foot impairment/footwear restriction (FIS(IF)) and activity limitation/participation restriction (FIS(AP)). Explanatory variables investigated included ultrasound-detectable forefoot pathology and markers of disease activity., Results: Disabling foot complications were highly prevalent on all occasions. Changes in foot impairment and activity limitation were significantly associated with fluctuations in disease activity (Disease Activity Score in 28 joints using the erythrocyte sedimentation rate [DAS28-ESR]: r = 0.455, P < 0.0001; ESR: r = -0.356, P = 0.008 and DAS28-ESR: r = 0.433, P = 0.001; ESR: r = -0.439, P = 0.001 for the FIS(IF) and FIS(AP), respectively), and approaching a significant association with changes in forefoot bursae (FIS(IF): r = 0.255, P = 0.063 and FIS(AP): r = 0.255, P = 0.063). The presence of disease duration and forefoot bursae was a significant prognostic indicator of foot impairment (P = 0.009 and P = 0.012, respectively), explaining 16% of score variability in the final regression model. Disease duration, forefoot bursae, and erosion presence were identified as significant prognostic indicators of activity limitation (P = 0.002, P = 0.006, and P = 0.019, respectively), explaining 35% of score variability in the final regression model., Conclusion: Despite advances in disease management, patients report disability associated with foot problems. Forefoot bursae should be considered for targeted therapy., (Copyright © 2012 by the American College of Rheumatology.)

Introduction: The aim of this study was to examine the incidence and progression of foot osteoarthritis (OA), as well as associated factors, in a community-based cohort. Methods: Baseline (2013–2015) and follow-up (2016–2018) foot radiographs were available for 541 participants (71% women, mean age 69 years; 35% black, 53% with obesity). The LaTrobe Foot Atlas was used to examine osteophytes (OPs, score 0–3) and joint space narrowing (JSN, score 0–3) at 5 joint sites. Incident foot radiographic OA (rOA) was a baseline score <2 OP and JSN in all 5 joints with ≥2 OP or JSN at follow-up in any of the joints. Progression was a worsening OP or JSN score in a joint with baseline foot rOA. At baseline and follow-up, participants reported the presence/absence of foot symptoms and completed the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) for each foot. Joint-based logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to examine associations (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 95% confidence interval [CI]) of foot rOA incidence and progression and with covariates. Results: Among 928 feet without baseline rOA, 4% developed incident foot rOA (2% of those developed symptoms). Among 154 feet with baseline foot rOA, 55% had radiographic progression (16% of those had symptoms). Women and those with higher body mass index (BMI) were more likely to have incident foot rOA (aOR [95% CI] = 4.10 [1.22, 13.8] and 1.60 [1.31, 1.97], respectively); history of gout was associated with incidence or progression of foot rOA (2.75 [1.24, 6.07]). BMI was associated with worse scores on all FAOS subscales (aORs range 1.21–1.40). Conclusion: Progression of foot rOA is common but not necessarily related to worsening symptoms. BMI may be a modifiable risk factor for foot OA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The high ill‐health burden associated with musculoskeletal (MSK) disease has been widely reported, and various treatment approaches proposed. Increasingly, treatments have sought to reflect personalised care and incorporate self‐management (SM). However, the range of SM approaches proposed for foot and ankle MSK problems, and their relative clinical or cost‐effectiveness, has not been reviewed. A scoping review is required to understand the need/appropriateness of a systematic review on this topic. Methods and analysis: The scoping review will be conducted in line with the PRISMA‐ScR framework. We will perform an initial search across two databases to confirm search syntax. We will then complete a full search across three databases (Embase [Ovid], CINAHL [EBSCO], and Medline [EBSCO]) and grey literature (Cochrane Library, The British Library, The Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health [CADTH], The Health Foundation, The Kings Fund, and MedNar). We will use a snowballing strategy to review the reference list of retrieved texts, as per inclusion criteria, to identify previously unretrieved texts of potential relevance. In an iterative process, the protocol outlined above will be refined and repeated as new key terms come to light. Ethics and dissemination: The scoping review will synthesise what is known and not known about SM approaches for MSK foot and ankle problems. The review will form the first step in outlining future research recommendations and areas of potentially unmet clinical need. The findings will be submitted for publication and shared in written form with stakeholder groups involved in the design of future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the long-term prevalence, natural history, progression, and incidence of radiographic first metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint osteoarthritis (OA).Methods: A longitudinal cohort design was used in which radiographic OA at the first MTP joint was investigated in participants from the Chingford 1,000 Women Study at year 6 (1995) and year 23 (2013-2015). Radiographic features of osteophytes (OPs) and/or joint space narrowing (JSN) at the first MTP joint were scored according to a validated foot atlas. Natural history was determined by the change in prevalence, incidence, progression, and worsening of OA in the first MTP joint.Results: Complete case-matched foot radiographic data were available for 193 of the women currently enrolled in the study (mean ± SD age 75.7 ± 5.2 years [range 69-90 years]). At the level of the first MTP joint, prevalence of OA at year 6 was 21.76% in the left and 24.35% in the right; at year 23, it was 23.83% in the left and 32.64% in the right. Over the 19-year period, 13.5% of the women developed incident OA in the right first MTP joint and 8.3% in the left. Both progression and worsening of OA were more evident for OPs and in the right first MTP joints.Conclusion: In this study of the natural history of radiographic first MTP joint OA, which to our knowledge is the longest study to date, the prevalence and incidence of first MTP joint OA increased over a 19-year period. Progression and/or worsening of OA at the first MTP joint over time appears to be driven by OP development rather than JSN, which suggests a biomechanical cause. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Foot and ankle osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and disabling problem that adversely affects physical function and significantly reduces quality of life. Although the knee was considered to be the lower-limb site most often affected by OA, recent population data showed foot OA is as prevalent as knee OA, and rates increase with advancing years. The most common foot OA sites include the first metatarsophalangeal joint and the midfoot, with the ankle affected less often. Despite the high prevalence and disabling nature of foot and ankle OA, the condition has been neglected by clinical researchers, and there are very few trials investigating non-surgical foot or ankle OA treatment options. There are no accepted clinical diagnostic criteria for foot or ankle OA so imaging remains common. Clinical guidelines based on knee and hip OA research recommend education, exercise, and weight loss in the first instance. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or capsaicin may be used as an adjunct. Failing these approaches, acetaminophen (paracetamol) should be recommended; however, if there is inadequate symptomatic relief, then clinicians should trial an oral NSAID or a cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor. Given that adverse events and co-morbidities are common in the elderly, older patients should be closely monitored. Some studies have investigated intra-articular injections for foot and ankle OA, and there is some evidence to suggest hyaluronic acid may be effective in the short term for ankle OA. With the lack of research on foot or ankle OA treatments, however, robust clinical trials are urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers the authors' views on the continued application of subtalar joint neutral theory (STJN) in treating foot-associated musculoskeletal symptomology. They mention that the theory was made by physician Merton L. Root who conducted biomechanical evaluations which led him to acknowledge the significance of the joint. An overview of its unreliability and inaccuracy to its history is also presented.s