İİŞİTME ENGELLİ ÇOCUKLARDA AYAKKABI UYGUNLUĞUNUN AYAK TABAN BASINÇ DAĞILIMI, DENGE VE YÜRÜME FONKSİYONU ÜZERİNE ETKİSİ

Öz

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, işitme engelli çocuklarda çocukların kullanmış olduğu ayakkabılara ait özelliklerin dinamik ve statik plantar basınç dağılım parametreleri ve denge parametreleri üzerine etkisinin olup olmadığını araştırmak ve işitme engeli olmayan çocuklarla karşılaştırmaktı. Yöntem: Çalışmaya 68 işitme engelli ve 68 sağlıklı olmak üzere toplam 136 çocuk dahil edildi. Çocukların ayakkabılarını değerlendirmek amacıyla Ayakkabı Uygunluğu Değerlendirme Formu (AUDF) uygulandı. Çocukların statik dengesini değerlendirmek için Flamingo Denge Testi (FDT), dinamik dengesini değerlendirmek için Fonksiyonel Uzanma Testi (FUT) kullanıldı. Çocukların statik ve dinamik ayak tabanı basınç dağılım ölçümleri sensörlü yürüyüş platformu (Footscan® pedobarografi sistemi (RsScan-FootScan lab ltd., Ipswich, England)) ile gerçekleştirildi. Sonuçlar: İşitme engelli çocuklarda dominant ayağa ait AUDF ile toplam yüklenme oranı değerleri arasında pozitif ilişki; sağlıklı çocuklarda ise dominant ayağa ait AUDF ile ayağın arka bölümüne yapılan yüklenme oranı arasında negatif ve non-dominant ayağa ait AUDF ile ayağın ön bölümüne yapılan yüklenme oranı değerleri ile arasında pozitif ilişki olduğu gözlemlendi (p<0,05). Her iki grupta AUDF ile denge testleri, dinamik ayak taban basınç değerleri, yürüme parametreleri arasında anlamlı ilişki bulunmadı (p>0,05). Tartışma: İşitme engelli çocuklarda ayakkabı uygunluğunun dominant ayakta statik yüklenme oranı ile artış göstermesi denge problemi olan çocukların kendilerini daha güvende hissetmek için dominant ayağa daha fazla oranda yüklendiklerinin bir göstergesi olabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Denge
• Ayakkabı
• İşitme Engelli
• Taban Basınç Dağılımı

THE EFFECTS OF SHOE SUITABILITY ON PLANTAR PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AND BALANCE PARAMETERS IN CHILDREN WITH HEARING IMPAIRMENT

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the characteristics of the shoes used by the children have an effect on the dynamic and static plantar pressure distribution parameters and balance parameters in hearing impaired children, and to compare the results with those of nonhearing- impaired children. Methods: The study included 136 children, 68 children with hearing impairment and 68 children without hearing impairment. The Footwear Assessment Score (FAS) was applied to evaluate children's footwear. Flamingo Balance Test (FBT) was used to evaluate the static balance of the children, and the Functional Reach Test (FRT) was used to evaluate the dynamic balance of the children. Static and dynamic plantar pressure distribution measurements of the children were carried out with a sensored walking platform (Footscan® pedobarography system (RsScan-FootScan lab ltd., Ipswich, England)). Results: In hearing impaired children, a positive relationship was found between FAS and dominant foot total percentage of pressure values. In children without hearing impairment, there was a negative relationship between FAS and dominant hindfoot pressure, and a positive relationship between FAS and anterior non-dominant foot pressure (p<0.05). There was no significant relationship of FAS with balance tests, dynamic plantar pressure values, and walking parameters in both groups (p>0.05). Conclusions: The increase in static loading with the footwear suitability on the dominant foot in hearing impaired children may be an indication that children with balance problems load more on the dominant foot in order to feel safer.

Keywords

• Balance
• Footwear
• Hearing Impaired
• Plantar Pressure Distribution

References

1. 1. Mancini P, Atturo F, Di Mario A, Portanova G, Ralli M, De Virgilio A., et al. Hearing loss in autoimmune disorders: Prevalence and therapeutic options. Autoimmun Rev. 2018;17(7):644-52.
2. 2. Watkin PM, &Baldwin M. Identifying deafness in early childhood: Requirements after the newborn hearing screen. Arch Dis Child. 2011; 96:62–66.
3. 3. Rine R, Spielholz N, Buchman C. Postural control in children with sensorineural hearing loss and vestibular hypofunction: deficits in sensory system effectiveness and vestibulospinal function. Control of Posture and Gait. 2001:40-5.
4. 4. Kim, D. H., & Jang, S. H. Effects of Mirror Therapy Combined with EMG-Triggered Functional Electrical Stimulation to Improve on Standing Balance and Gait Ability in Patient with Chronic Stroke. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021;18(7):3721.
5. 5. Steindl R, Kunz K, Schrott-Fischer A, Scholtz A. Effect of age and sex on maturation of sensory systems and balance control. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2006;48(6):477-82.
6. 6. Greenwald BD, Gurley JM. Balance and vestibular function. NeuroRehabilitation. 2013;32(3):433-5.
7. 7. An MH, Yi CH, Jeon HS, Park SY. Age-related changes of single-limb standing balance in children with and without deafness. Int. J. Ped. Otorhinolaryngol. 2009;73(11):1539-44.
8. 8. Walicka-Cupryś K, Przygoda Ł, Czenczek E, Truszczyńska A, Drzał-Grabiec J, Zbigniew T, et al. Balance assessment in hearing impaired children. Res Dev Disabil. 2014;35(11):2728-2734.

9. 9. Dawe EJ, Davis J. (vi) Anatomy and biomechanics of the foot and ankle. Orthopaedics and Trauma. 2011;25(4):279-86.
10. 10. Kaplan T, Bayramlar K, Maden Ç, Günseli U, Yakut Y. Yaşlı bireylerde ayakkabı uygunluğunun düşme korkusuna olan etkisinin araştırılması. JETR. 2018;5(3):167-72.
11. 11. Yurt Y, Sener G, Yakut Y. Footwear suitability in Turkish preschool- aged children. Prosthetics Orthot Int. 2014;38(3):224-31.
12. 12. Alpar R. Spor, sağlık ve eğitim bilimlerinden örneklerle uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik-güvenirlik. 3. Baskı ed. Ankara: Detay Yayıncılık; 2014.
13. 13. Yakut Y, Yurt Y, Bek N. Footwear assessment score‘un Türkçe versiyonunun güvenirliği. TJPR. 2010;21(3):234.
14. 14. Barton CJ, Bonanno D, Menz HB. Development and evaluation of a tool for the assessment of footwear characteristics. J Foot Ankle Res. 2009;2(1):1-12.
15. 15. Byrne M, Curran M. The development and use of a footwear assessment score in comparing the fit of children’s shoes. The Foot. 1998;8(4):215-8.
16. 16. Yuksel E, Ozcan Kahraman B, Nalbant A, Kocak UZ, & Unver, B. Functional reach and lateral reach tests in Turkish children. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2017;37(4):389-98.
17. 17. de Waroquier-Leroy L, Bleuse S, Serafi R, Watelain E, Pardessus V, Tiffreau, A. V., et al. The Functional Reach Test: strategies, performance and the influence of age. Ann Phys Rehabil Med. 2014;57(6-7):452-64.
18. 18. Suresh, I., Kumar, A. V., Bharath, R. G., Raja, R., Ravish, V. N., Hari, K. R., & Rajeeva, A. Evalution of effectiveness of balance training in conventional prosthesis versus ultramodern prosthesis in unilateral transtibial amputee by using Flamingo balance test. J Evol Med Dent Sci. 2014;3(35):9207-9216.
19. 19. Kramer M, Du Randt R, & Venter D. Dynamic plantar pressure profiles of South African university students. S. Afr. J. Sports Med. 2015;27(1):4-11. 20.
20. 20. Bellizzi M, Rizzo G, Bellizzi G, Ranieri M, Fanelli M, Megna G, et al. Electronic baropodometry in patients affected by ocular torticollis. Strabismus. 2011;19(1):21-5.
21. 21. Bennetts CJ, Owings TM, Erdemir A, Botek G, Cavanagh PR. Clustering and classification of regional peak plantar pressures of diabetic feet. J. Biomech. 2013;46(1):19-25.
22. 22. Staheli LT. Shoes for children: a review. Pediatrics. 1991;88(2):371-5.
23. 23. Wallace J, White H, Augsburger S, Shapiro R, Walker J. Foot pressure analysis using the EMED® in typically developing children and adolescents: A summary of current techniques and typically developing cohort data for comparison with pathology. The Foot. 2018;37:28-37.
24. 24. Tan JS. The balance control of young children under different shoe conditions in a naturalistic environment. Gait & Posture. 2019;68:68-71. 25. Deshmukh AA, Ganesan S, Tedla JS. Normal values of functional reach and lateral reach tests in Indian school children. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2011;23(1):23-30.
25. 26. Tomkinson GR, Carver KD, Atkinson F, Daniell ND, Lewis LK, Fitzgerald JS, et al. European normative values for physical fitness in children and adolescents aged 9–17 years: results from 2 779 165 Eurofit performances representing 30 countries. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52(22):1445-56.
26. 27. Wegener C, Hunt AE, Vanwanseele B, Burns J, Smith RM. Effect of children’s shoes on gait: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Foot Ankle Res. 2011;4(1):3.
27. 28. Abd Elkader S, Abd Elhafz Y, Al-Abdulrazaq S. Foot taping versus medical shoes on kinematic gait parameters in children with down’s syndrome. World Appl Sci J. 2013;27:311-7.
28. 29. Ivanyi B, Schoenmakers M, van Veen N, Maathuis K, Nollet F, Nederhand M. The effects of orthoses, footwear, and walking aids on the walking ability of children and adolescents with spina bifida: A systematic review using International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health for Children and Youth (ICF-CY) as a reference framework. Prosthetics Orthot Int. 2015;39(6):437-43.
29. 30. Hill M, Healy A, Chockalingam N. Key concepts in children’s footwear research: a scoping review focusing on therapeutic footwear. J Foot Ankle Res. 2019;12(1):1-13.