Home Forums Marketplace Table of Contents Events Member List Site Map Register Mark Forums Read



Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Tags: , ,

Reproducibility of different negative model production techniques

Reply
Submit Thread >  Submit to Digg Submit to Reddit Submit to Furl Submit to Del.icio.us Submit to Google Submit to Yahoo! This Submit to Technorati Submit to StumbleUpon Submit to Spurl Submit to Netscape  < Submit Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 1st May 2012, 11:29 AM
NewsBot's Avatar
NewsBot NewsBot is offline
The Admin that posts the news.
 
About:
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Zoo, where all good monkeys should be
Posts: 13,579
Join Date: Jan 2006
Marketplace reputation 53% (0)
Thanks: 14
Thanked 584 Times in 474 Posts
Default Reproducibility of different negative model production techniques

Podiatry Arena members do not see these ads
Computer-aided design of customized foot orthoses: reproducibility and effect of method used to obtain foot shape.
Telfer S, Gibson KS, Hennessy K, Steultjens MP, Woodburn J.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 May;93(5):863-70.
Quote:
OBJECTIVE:
To determine, for a number of techniques used to obtain foot shape based around plaster casting, foam box impressions, and 3-dimensional scanning, (1) the effect the technique has on the overall reproducibility of custom foot orthoses (FOs) in terms of inter- and intracaster reliability and (2) the reproducibility of FO design by using computer-aided design (CAD) software in terms of inter- and intra-CAD operator reliability for all these techniques.

DESIGN:
Cross-sectional study.

SETTING:
University laboratory.

PARTICIPANTS:
Convenience sample of individuals (N=22) with noncavus foot types.

INTERVENTIONS:
Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
Parameters of the FO design (length, width at forefoot, width at rearfoot, and peak medial arch height), the forefoot to rearfoot angle of the foot shape, and overall volume match between device designs.

RESULTS:
For intra- and intercaster reliability of the different methods of obtaining the foot shape, all methods fell below the reproducibility quality threshold for the medial arch height of the device, and volume matching was <80% for all methods. The more experienced CAD operator was able to achieve excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.75) for all variables with the exception of forefoot to rearfoot angle, with overall volume matches of >87% of the devices.

CONCLUSIONS:
None of the techniques for obtaining foot shape met all the criteria for excellent reproducibility, with the peak arch height being particularly variable. Additional variability is added at the CAD stage of the FO design process, although with adequate operator experience good to excellent reproducibility may be achieved at this stage. Taking only basic linear or angular measurement parameters from the device may fail to fully capture the variability in FO design.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 1st May 2012, 04:32 PM
Admin2's Avatar
Admin2 Admin2 is offline
Administrator
 
About:
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cyberspace
Posts: 3,887
Join Date: May 2005
Marketplace reputation 0% (0)
Thanks: 15
Thanked 139 Times in 123 Posts
Default Re: Reproducibility of different negative model production techniques

Related threads:
Other threads tagged with negative model production
Other threads tagged with casting
Other threads tagged with orthotic fabrication
Plaster casting vs 3D Laser scan
POP casting vs Impression box casting
The Pros and Cons of Computerized Foot Orthotic Technology
Laser scanning vs casting: Yes or No!
Using scanners to capture images of the foot for orthoses construction
Laser foot scanner or plaster cast?
Reliability of casting techniques
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Translate This Page

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Different methods of negative model production French summer Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses 4 15th October 2010 02:44 AM
Negative Heeled Shoes... as therapy?! fatboy Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses 0 29th April 2010 05:28 AM
Negative Galvanic Current for Matrixectomy Kent General Issues and Discussion Forum 3 27th July 2009 06:18 PM
Pouring the negative cast Little Sesamoid Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses 23 16th April 2009 05:55 AM
New Invention: Non WB Negative Casting!! Kevin Kirby Podiatry Trivia 6 31st March 2007 08:00 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

Finding your way around:

Browse the forums.

Search the site.

Browse the tags.

Search the tags.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:59 AM.