METHODOLOGY: Twenty healthy adults (8 males, 12 females, age: 29±4.10years, BMI: 21.56±2.36kg/m2) participated in this study. Static and dynamic (levels 8 and 2) balance with single stance and double stance and dynamic (level 8 and levels 6-2) for risk of fall with double stance were tested with the Biodex Balance System with three self-selected feet positions: straight (13.8°), toe-out (35.6°) and toe-in (-11.9°) for each test condition. Additionally, TUG test was performed with toe-out and toe-in gait.
RESULTS: The results of repeated measures ANOVA showed significant differences (p<0.05) between straight and modified toe angles in balance at dynamic level 2 with both double and single stance conditions. Significant differences (p<0.001) were also found in TUG scores for the test conditions.
CONCLUSION: Toe-in and toe-out gait modifications have significant effects on balance at higher levels of platform tilt and functional balance. Further investigations with knee osteoarthritis patients and electromyography may provide insight in balancing strategies adopted by the body in toe-out and toe-in gait.
OBJECTIVES:: To test the hypothesis that toe-out gait will reduce second peak knee adduction moment further and increase fall risk when combined with knee brace and laterally wedged insole in knee osteoarthritis patients.
STUDY DESIGN:: Single visit study with repeated measures.
METHODS:: First and second peak knee adduction moments, fall risk and comfort level. First and second peak knee adduction moments were determined from three-dimensional gait analysis, completed under six randomized conditions: (1) natural, (2) knee brace, (3) knee brace + toe-out gait, (4) laterally wedged insole, (5) laterally wedged insole + toe-out gait, and (6) knee brace + laterally wedged insole + toe-out gait. Fall risk was assessed by Biodex Balance System using three randomized stability settings: (1) static, (2) moderate dynamic setting (FR12), and (3) high dynamic setting (FR8).
RESULTS:: The reduction in first peak knee adduction moment and second peak knee adduction moment was greatest (7.16% and 25.55%, respectively) when toe-out gait combine with knee brace and laterally wedged insole. Significant increase in fall risk was observed with knee brace + laterally wedged insole + toe-out gait (42.85%) at FR12. Similar significant balance reductions were found at FR8 condition for knee brace + toe-out gait (35.71%), laterally wedged insole + toe-out gait (28.57%), and knee brace + laterally wedged insole + toe-out gait (50%) as compared to natural. However, knee brace decreased fall risk at FR12 by 28.57%.
CONCLUSION:: There is a synergistic effect of toe-out when combined with knee brace and laterally wedged insole concurrently in second peak knee adduction moment reduction but with a greater degree of fall risk. Simultaneous use of conservative treatments also decreases comfort level.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Patients with mild and moderate knee osteoarthritis are usually prescribed conservative treatment techniques. This study will provide an insight whether or not a combination of these techniques have a synergistic effect in reducing knee joint load.
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to examine the extent and identify factors associated with psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study across 17 countries during Jun-2020 to Jan-2021. Levels of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale), fear of COVID-19 (Fear of COVID-19 Scale), and coping (Brief Resilient Coping Scale) were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 8,559 people participated; mean age (±SD) was 33(±13) years, 64% were females and 40% self-identified as frontline workers. More than two-thirds (69%) experienced moderate-to-very high levels of psychological distress, which was 46% in Thailand and 91% in Egypt. A quarter (24%) had high levels of fear of COVID-19, which was as low as 9% in Libya and as high as 38% in Bangladesh. More than half (57%) exhibited medium to high resilient coping; the lowest prevalence (3%) was reported in Australia and the highest (72%) in Syria. Being female (AOR 1.31 [95% CIs 1.09-1.57]), perceived distress due to change of employment status (1.56 [1.29-1.90]), comorbidity with mental health conditions (3.02 [1.20-7.60]) were associated with higher levels of psychological distress and fear. Doctors had higher psychological distress (1.43 [1.04-1.97]), but low levels of fear of COVID-19 (0.55 [0.41-0.76]); nurses had medium to high resilient coping (1.30 [1.03-1.65]).
CONCLUSIONS: The extent of psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping varied by country; however, we identified few higher risk groups who were more vulnerable than others. There is an urgent need to prioritise health and well-being of those people through well-designed intervention that may need to be tailored to meet country specific requirements.