A case-series study to explore the efficacy of foot orthoses in treating first metatarsophalangeal joint pain

Background: First metatarsophalangeal (MTP) joint pain is a common foot complaint which is often considered to be a consequence of altered mechanics. Foot orthoses are often prescribed to reduce 1 stMTP joint pain with the aim of altering dorsiflexion at propulsion. This study explores changes in 1 stMTP joint pain and kinematics following the use of foot orthoses.Methods: The effect of modified, pre-fabricated foot orthoses (X-line ®) were evaluated in thirty-two patients with 1 stMTP joint pain of mechanical origin. The primary outcome was pain measured at baseline and 24 weeks using the pain subscale of the foot function index (FFI). In a small sub-group of patients (n = 9), the relationship between pain and kinematic variables was explored with and without their orthoses, using an electromagnetic motion tracking (EMT) system.Results: A significant reduction in pain was observed between baseline (median = 48 mm) and the 24 week endpoint (median = 14.50 mm, z = -4.88, p < 0.001). In the sub-group analysis, we found no relationship between pain reduction and 1 stMTP joint motion, and no significant differences were found between the 1 stMTP joint maximum dorsiflexion or ankle/subtalar complex maximum eversion, with and without the orthoses.Conclusions: This observational study demonstrated a significant decrease in 1 stMTP joint pain associated with the use of foot orthoses. Change in pain was not shown to be associated with 1 stMTP joint dorsiflexion nor with altered ankle/subtalar complex eversion. Further research into the effect of foot orthoses on foot function is indicated. © 2010 Welsh et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd

Death, treatment decisions and the permanent vegetative state: evidence from families and experts

Some brain injured patients are left in a permanent vegetative state, i.e., they have irreversibly lost their capacity for consciousness but retained some autonomic physiological functions, such as breathing unaided. Having discussed the controversial nature of the permanent vegetative state as a diagnostic category, we turn to the question of the patients’ ontological status. Are the permanently vegetative alive, dead, or in some other state? We present empirical data from interviews with relatives of patients, and with experts, to support the view that the ontological state of permanently vegetative patients is unclear: such patients are neither straightforwardly alive nor simply dead. Having defended this view from counter-arguments we turn to the practical question as to how these patients ought to be treated. Some relatives and experts believe it is right for patients to be shifted from their currently unclear ontological state to that of being straightforwardly dead, but many are concerned or even horrified by the only legally sanctioned method guaranteed to achieve this, namely withdrawal of clinically assisted nutrition and hydration. A way of addressing this distress would be to allow active euthanasia for these patients. This is highly controversial; but we argue that standard objections to allowing active euthanasia for this particular class of permanently vegetative patients are weakened by these patients’ distinctive ontological status