The Effect of the Scotchcast Boot and the Aircast Device on Foot Pressures of the Contralateral Foot
- Thu, 9/4/08 - 11:52am
- 1 Comments
- 2674 reads
Introduction
Offloading devices are commonly used to facilitate wound healing in the diabetic foot. These devices work on the principle of reducing pressure loading at the active wound site, thereby allowing the wound to heal without the constant pressure applied to the wound. Several offloading devices have been developed over the years that include commercial off-the-shelf and custom-made devices. Offloading devices are often bulky and heavy in order to allow offloading, which may potentially lead to asymmetrical gait or problems with maintaining balance during walking.
A history of foot ulceration is one of the strongest risk factors for future foot ulceration. Consequently, closely monitoring the contralateral foot when providing an offloading device to a patient is important. Although several authors have shown that offloading devices are effective in wound healing and reducing the pressure at the ulcerated foot,[1–8] few have shown the effects offloading devices may have on the contralateral foot. Lavery and colleagues reported on pressures measured in the contralateral foot in patients wearing total contact casts for offloading their foot ulcers.[9] The authors reported that reducing the peak pressure with a total contact cast on the ulcer site did not increase pressures on the contralateral foot.
The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of two different offloading devices on foot pressures on the contralateral foot. The two devices tested were the Scotchcast boot (SCB), which is a custom-made up-to-ankle-level device, and an Aircast device (AIR) (Aircast Inc., Lincolnshire, United Kingdom), an off-the-shelf, below-knee device. The authors hypothesized that there may be a different effect on the contralateral foot between an ankle- and a knee-level offloading device caused by differences in limitation of movement at the ankle joint.
The results presented in this paper are part of a larger study looking at the efficiency of the two offloading devices.
Methods
Twenty-two consecutive diabetic patients with active or recently healed plantar ulcers were recruited from the Manchester Diabetes Centre. All patients were using the SCB as part of their foot ulcer treatment.
The study was approved by the local ethics committee; all patients received full information about the study and gave informed consent before any testing was carried out.
Foot pressures were measured in three different footwear conditions, as follows: the post-op sandal (SAN) (Benefoot UK Ltd, Prestwich, United Kingdom)was used as a control condition and the SCB and the AIR were used as the two offloading devices. The offloading devices were worn on the affected feet only. In each footwear condition, a SAN was worn on the unaffected foot. No stockings were worn during testing on either foot in order to standardize the pressure measurements. Dressings were worn at the ulcer site throughout the experiment as necessary.
The SAN was used as the control condition. It features a dual density 3/16-inch insole, a flared outsole with a rocker bottom, a reinforced heel counter, a padded collar and top-line, and an upper shoe made from mesh nylon.
The SCB is custom made for each patient and has been used for more than 15 years at the Manchester Foot Hospital and Manchester Diabetes Centre.[10,11] It is made by first applying ribbed stockinette from beyond the toes to above the ankle. Nine-millimeter–thick orthopedic felt (at half thickness) is then wrapped around the ankle, crossing over the top of the foot and securing it with tape. Felt is placed under the sole of and around the foot. Orthopedic wool is applied over the felt, and over this layer, a layer of foam roll is applied. Fiberglass tape is finally applied, making the boot solid and durable. The boot is reinforced under the sole with a sheet of fiberglass. A windowed area is cut to relieve pressure from the ulcer site.
References
1. Lavery LA, Vela SA, Lavery DC, Quebedeaux TL. Reducing dynamic foot pressure in high-risk diabetic subjects with foot ulcerations. Diabetes Care 1996;19(8):818–21.
2. Fleischli JG, Lavery LA, Vela SA, et al. Comparison of strategies for reducing pressure at the site of neuropathic ulcers. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 1997;87:166–72.
3. Shaw JE, Hsi WL, Ulbrecht JS, et al. The mechanism of plantar unloading in total contact casts: Implications for design and clinical use. Foot Ankle Internat 1997;18:809–17.
4. Baumhauer JF, Wervey R, McWilliams J, et al. A comparison study of plantar foot pressure in a standardized shoe, total contact cast, and prefabricated pneumatic walking brace. Foot Ankle Internat 1997;18:26–33.
5. Armstrong DG, Nguyen HC, Lavery LA, et al. Off-loading the diabetic foot wound. Diabetes Care 2001;24:1019–22.
6. Chantelau E, Breuer U, Leisch AC, Tanudjaja T, Reuter M. Outpatient treatment of unilateral diabetic foot ulcers with “half shoes.” Diabetic Med 1993;10:267–70.
7. Helm PA, Walker SC, Pullium G. Total contact casting in diabetic patients with neuropathic foot ulcerations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1984;65:691–3.
8. Caravaggi C, Faglia E, DeGiglio R, et al. Effectiveness and safety of a nonremovable fiberglass off-bearing cast versus a therapeutic shoe in the treatment of neuropathic foot ulcers. Diabetes Care 2000;23:1746–51.
9. Lavery LA, Vela SA, Lavery DC, Quebedeaux TL. Total contact casts: Pressure reduction at ulcer sites and the effect on the contra-lateral foot. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1997;78:1268–71.
10. Knowles AE, Armstrong DG, Hayat SA, et al. Offloading diabetic foot wounds using the Scotchcast boot: A retrospective study. Ostomy Wound Manage 2002;48:50–3.
11. Knowles AE, Boulton AJM. Use of the Scotchcast boot to heal diabetic foot ulcers. Proceedings of 5th European Conference of Advanced Wound Care. London, UK: McMillan Publishers, 1996:199–201.
12. Veves A, van Ross ER, Boulton AJM. Foot pressure measurements in diabetic and non diabetic amputees. Diabetes Care 1992;15(7):905–7.








A very good study on different device on foot ulcers
Reply to this comment »