Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32660591›Full record

Observational studyJournal of foot and ankle research2020

Feasibility of the Archercise biofeedback device to strengthen foot musculature.

Penelope J Latey, John Eisenhuth, Marnee J McKay, Claire E Hiller, Premala Sureshkumar, Elizabeth J Nightingale, Joshua Burns

Open access · goldAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 45% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Penelope J LateyThe University of Sydney, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia. penny.latey@sydney.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7663-0592
John EisenhuthThe University of Sydney, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.
Marnee J McKayThe University of Sydney, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.
Claire E HillerThe University of Sydney, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.
Premala SureshkumarThe University of Sydney, Concord Clinical School, Concord, New South Wales, 2139, Australia.
Elizabeth J NightingaleThe University of Sydney, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.
Joshua BurnsThe University of Sydney, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Lidcombe, New South Wales, 2141, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFoot muscle weakness can produce foot deformity, pain and disability. Toe flexor and foot arch exercises focused on intrinsic foot muscle strength and functional control may mitigate the progression of foot deformity and disability. Ensuring correct exercise technique is challenging due to the specificity of muscle activation required to complete some foot exercises. Biofeedback has been used to improve adherence, muscle activity and movement patterns. We investigated the feasibility of using a novel medical device, known as "Archercise", to provide real-time biofeedback of correct arch movement via pressure change in an inflatable bladder, and foot location adherence via sensors embedded in a footplate during four-foot exercises.

methodsThirty adults (63% female, aged 23-68 years) performed four-foot exercises twice on the Archercise sensor footplate alone and then with biofeedback. One-way repeated measures ANOVA with pairwise comparisons were computed to assess the consistency of the exercise protocol between trial 1 and trial 2 (prior to biofeedback), and the effectiveness of the Archercise biofeedback device between trial 2 and trial 3 (with biofeedback). Outcome measures were: Arch movement exercises of arch elevation and lowering speed, controlled arch elevation, controlled arch lowering, endurance of arch elevation; Foot location adherence was determined by percentage of time the great toe, fifth toe and heel contacted footplate sensors during testing and were analysed with paired sample t-tests. Participant survey comments on the use of Archercise with biofeedback were reported thematically.

resultsSeventeen (89%) arch movement and foot location variables were collected consistently with Archercise during the foot exercises. Archercise with biofeedback improved foot location adherence for all exercises (p = 0.003-0.008), coefficient of determination for controlled arch elevation (p < 0.0001) and endurance area ratio (p = 0.001). Twenty-nine (97%) participants reported Archercise with biofeedback, helped correct exercise performance.

conclusionsArchercise is a feasible biofeedback device to assist healthy participants without foot pathologies perform foot doming exercises.

trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): 12616001559404. Registered 11 November 2016, http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12616001559404p.aspx.

Indexed as

AdultAgedBiofeedback, PsychologyCross-Sectional StudiesExercise Movement TechniquesFeasibility StudiesFemaleFootHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMiddle AgedMuscle, SkeletalMuscle StrengthResistance TrainingYoung AdultBiofeedbackExercise adherenceIntrinsic foot musclesMotor skillsToe flexion

Identifiers

PMID32660591
PMCPMC7359285
OpenAlexW3040771699

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.