Global Utilities

Welcome to La Trobe University


What's New?
Learning Centre
Courses
Podiatry Staff
Podiatry Research
Podiatry Clinic
Contacts

Student Pages

Department Home




Department of Podiatry

Spinal mechanics related to foot function

 

Outline

Epidemiology of LBP

Diagnosis & risk factors

LBP in pregnancy

Basic spinal function

How might the foot affect the lower back?

Clinical studies

Preliminary research findings... (not included in notes)

Treatment

Summary


Epidemiology of LBP

Epidemic since WWII

Point prevalence in the US: 5.6% (Loney & Stratford, 1999)

60-85% lifetime incidence in Westernised countries

Largest grouping of non-fatal injuries in WorkCover(Vic): A$410 million (WorkCover Statistical Report, 1997-1998)

After the common cold, problems caused by low back pain are the most frequent cause of lost work days in adults under the age of 45

Proper functioning of the lower back is required for almost all activities of daily living


Background to LBP

Natural history characterised by variability & change

Hard to research

Diagnosis difficult - 70% cases described as 'non-specific' or 'miscellaneous' (Hart et al., 1995)

Bed rest vs. continuing light activity

Do 'functional restoration' programs work? (Teasell & Harth, 1996)


Diagnosed by…

Plain X-ray (Will show OA and bone disease, but not soft tissues like lumbar disks and nerves)

CT or MRI required for soft tissue imaging

Multifidus?

? Bone scan to assess bone activity

? EMG/NCS to determine if spinal condition has caused nerve or spinal damage


Risk factors include:

Increased age (influenced injury, influenced discomfort and symptoms)

Smoking

Previous hx of LBP

Years of employment and seniority

Younger employees higher incidence - more manual handling?

Not as developed motor control?

Anthropometry

Exposure factors (lifting, bending…)

Psychological and psychosocial (stressful life events, job satisfaction…) (Ferguson & Marras, 1997)


 

 LBP in pregnancy

76% of 200 subjects reported back pain

48% @ 24 weeks gestation; highest prevalence rate

30% reported great difficulties with normal activities

Aetiology:

Hormone related (relaxin?)

Foetal pressure on lumbosacral nerve roots?

Biomechanical malalignment?

(Kristiansson et al, 1996)

 


Structural diagnosis

As mentioned, only in 20-30% of cases is a specific anatomical diagnosis made

disk herniation

Abnormal protrusion - may impinge on nerve roots

spinal stenosis

'narrowing' of the VC

Spondyloarthrosis

Osteoarthritis of the spine

all other cases are termed 'idiopathic'

however, there is increasing evidence that faulty foot mechanics may be at least a contributing factor in the development of LBP


Spinal Anatomy

Spinal function

7 cervical, 12 thoracic, 5 lumbar 'true' vertebrae separated by IV disks

5 sacral and 4 coccygeal 'pseudo' vertebrae, fused

the neutral spine is comprised of 3 curves which contribute to shock attenuation: cervical and lumbar lordosis (sway back), thoracic kyphosis (hunch back)

due to the lumbar lordosis, there is a constant anterior shear force at the lumbosacral joint (L5-S1), the most stressed spinal joint

posterior facet joints (zygoapophyseal) bear 10-40% of the total load and control spinal motion

the sacro-iliac joint is slightly moveable, and is involved in a movement called nutation (latin - 'nodding'), in which the sacrum moves forward and backward with bending of the trunk

 


How might the foot be related to the lower back?

 

Theoretical mechanisms include footwear heel height, inadequate shock absorption, XS foot pronation factors, functional LLD, sagittal plane blockade

Footwear heel height

Increase plantar pressures (Mandato & Nester, 1999)

Increase knee joint compressive forces (Kerrigan et al., 1998)

Lead to changes in the lower back? Maybe?

Increase in lumbar lordosis? Conflicting research.

 

Inadequate shock absorption

Voloshin & Wosk (1985)

Viscoelastic insoles, n = 382

'rapid & surprisingly significant improvement' (in 80% participants, 12/12)

Control group 45% improvement

Ogon et al. (1999)

Link between arch height and impact loading in the lower spine?

Running, n=12, over force platform with accelerometer attached

'high arch' = intrinsically better shock absorbing'?

High arch protective for the lower back?

Why counterintuitive result?

 

XS foot pronation factors

Similar underlying framework:

Internal limb rotation

Anteriolateral pelvic tilt

Strain iliopsoas, piriformis, gluteus maximus

Rotation of affected lumbar vertebral bodies

Functional lumbar scoliosis

… develop LBP?

 

Forefoot varus

Rothbart et al. (1995)

202 of 208 participants had a 'forefoot varus' ³ 16mm

Measured with 'Biovector™'

Proprietary orthosis design - big medial wedge

80% participants reported at least a 50% decrease in their LBP

 

Functional LLD

Unilateral excessive foot pronation = functional shortening of limb (Sanner et al., 1981)

Primarily clinical folklore

Single case study (Blake & Fettig, 1983)

 

Ability of sagittal plane pivots of the foot to function effectively

(Payne & Dananberg, 1997)

Particulary the 1st MTPJ

Functional hallux limitus = not normal dynamic function of 1st MTPJ

Number of theoretical sequelae of FHL

Midstance phase gait cycle - weightbearing limb starting to extend at hip joint

With a sagittal plane block, this motion is impeded...

 

FHL & LBP

a lack of biceps femoris contraction is thought to stop normal nutation and 'self-bracing' of the SIJ during midstance/propulsion phases of the gait cycle

Repetitive abnormal loading leads to LBP?

Clinical study - 32 participants CLBP, end-stage conservative Tx, Rx orthoses to facilitate sagittal plane motion, Questionnaire pre, 1+6 mths post tx, Twice improvement over not having orthoses (Dananberg & Guiliano, 1999)


Discussion

Which factors are more important?

Still lack of basic science connecting the foot and the back

Difficulty of 'gold standard' clinical trials

How to classify and diagnose?

Natural hx one of variability & change

Pain interpretation

Some measures have been shown to have some reliability & validity (Hudson-Cook, 1989, Stratford et al., 1994, Kopec et al., 1995)


Treatment

 lift therapy for LLD

orthoses for XS pronation

shock absorbing insoles / shoes for cavus foot type

chiropractic adjustment of secondary subluxations in spine and sacroiliac joint

 

 


Summary

Importance of lower extremity biomechanics in the development of CLBP

Foot orthoses have shown to be successful in a number of studies … but can they then cause harm?

Still no clear protocol for Mx


Click here for a link to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons website regarding LBP

References

Bird AR & Payne CB. Foot function and low back pain: a review of the literature. The Foot. 9: 175-180 (1999)

Minkowsky I & Minkowsky R. The spine, an integral part of the lower extremity. In: Valmassy RL (ed.) Clinical biomechanics of the lower extremities. CV Mosby, St. Louis, Chapter 4

Michaud, TC. Foot orthoses and other forms of conservative foot care. Massachusetts, p. 118

 


Content Approved by: Head of Podiatry
Page maintained by: Podiatry Webmaster
Last Updated: August 20th, 2002