0% found this document useful (0 votes)
154 views3 pages

Afo Table Final

The document discusses different types of ankle-foot orthotics (AFOs) including solid/rigid, ground reaction, semirigid, flexible/posterior leaf spring, and articulating AFOs. For each type it outlines benefits, considerations that may limit success, key design considerations, and example AFOs. The types provide varying levels of ankle support and control as well as implications for knee motion.

Uploaded by

taradarmaputra44
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
154 views3 pages

Afo Table Final

The document discusses different types of ankle-foot orthotics (AFOs) including solid/rigid, ground reaction, semirigid, flexible/posterior leaf spring, and articulating AFOs. For each type it outlines benefits, considerations that may limit success, key design considerations, and example AFOs. The types provide varying levels of ankle support and control as well as implications for knee motion.

Uploaded by

taradarmaputra44
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

AFO TYPES AND CONSIDERATIONS

www.neuropt.org

AFO/Description Benefits Considerations Key AFO Design Examples


that May Limit Considerations
Success
Solid or Rigid o ↑ DF in swing o Desire to allow o Material strength provides ↑ Solid AFO
Provides rigid o Adjustability of stiffness volitional muscle motion restriction & ankle o Anterior trimlines
support of ankle in by changing trimlines activation control o Thicker materials
desired position o ↑ stance phase knee o ↓ ankle PROM o ↑ AFO stiffness may lead o Fixed at ankle in slight PF,
that has flexion or extension by o Bulk & weight of to ↑ knee flexion at IC neutral, or DF based on
implications for restricting ankle motion AFO control needed
o Anterior trimlines ↑ ankle
knee control o ↓ equinovarus in stance o Desire for
control & AFO rigidity
o Possible ankle control allowing ankle DF
o AFO set in DF leads to knee
with PF spasticity during functional
flexion in stance
o ↑ static balance mobility
o AFO set in PF leads to knee
extension in stance
o ↑ AFO stiffness may ↑ knee
flexion at IC

Ground Reaction o ↑ DF in swing o Genu recurvatum o Anterior proximal contact of Ground Reaction AFO
Provides knee o Strong stance phase knee o Strong AFO leads to stance phase o Fixed at ankle in slight PF
stability through a flexion control hyperextension knee extension o Anterior shell for added tibial
posteriorly directed o Possible↑ gait speed if a thrust in stance o ↑ AFO stiffness may ↑ knee control
force on the soft heel or rocker sole is o Quadriceps flexion at IC o Carbon or plastic options
proximal tibia added to the shoe spasticity o AFO set in PF leads to knee
o ↑ static balance o Bulk & weight of extension in stance
AFO

Semirigid o ↑ DF in swing o PF spasticity o Material property choices Semirigid AFO


Provides varying o Adjustability of stiffness (≥MAS 3) restrict or allow motion o More posterior trimlines
degrees of rigidity by changing trimlines o ↓ strength or o AFO set in DF leads to knee o Ankle in slight PF, neutral, or
based on design & o ↑ stance phase knee control of the flexion in stance DF based on control needed
materials used flexion or extension by ankle or knee o AFO set in PF leads to knee o Some ankle motion allowed
limiting ankle motion muscles extension in stance based on material thickness
o ↑ gait speed if AFO has o Equinovarus and flexibility
o Anterior trimlines ↑ ankle
fewer restrictions to control & AFO rigidity
movement o Posterior trimlines ↓ ankle
o May ↑ dynamic balance control & AFO rigidity
based on design

Copyright Academy of Neurologic Physical Therapy, printed in Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy: April 2021-Volume 45 – Issue 2 – p112-196 ANPT Knowledge Translation Task Force: Elizabeth Cornforth, PT, DPT,
NCS; Bobbette Miller, DPT, NCS; Therese Johnston, PT, PhD; Lisa Brown, PT, DPT, NCS; Andrea Ecsedy, PT, DPT, NCS; Megan Greenwood, PT, DPT, MSPT, NCS, PCS; Ryan Koter, PT, DPT; Suzanne O'Neal, PT, DPT, DHSc, NCS;
Katherine Sweet, PT, DPT, NCS; Daniel Miner, PT, DPT
Flexible/ o PF spasticity o Material properties allow Posterior Leaf Spring AFO www.neuropt.org
o ↑ DF in swing
Posterior Leaf o Lightweight (≥MAS 3) motion o Most posterior trimline
Spring Provides o Pre-fabricated options o ↓ strength or o Posterior trimlines ↓ ankle o More ankle motion allowed
varying degrees of o ↑ gait speed control of the control & AFO rigidity due to material flexibility
flexibility based on ankle or knee o Minimal to no mediolateral
design & materials muscles ankle support
used o ↓ dynamic o Minimal to no effect at the
balance knee

Articulating o ↑ DF in swing o PF spasticity o Hinges allow motion Double Metal Upright AFO
Provides varying o Adjustable as patient’s (≥MAS 3) o Stops restrict motion o DF & PF stops set by adjusting
degrees of motion needs change o ↓ ankle PROM o AFO set in more DF leads screws/bars in each channel
at the ankle through o Allows for volitional o Bulk & weight of to ↑ knee flexion in stance o Springs can be added for DF
hinges with optional muscle activation AFO o AFO set in more PF leads to assist
stops to limit ROM o ↑ stance phase knee o ↓ medial/lateral ↑ knee extension in stance o Good option with edema & to
if desired flexion or extension by ankle stability allow modifications with
allowing or restricting recovery
ankle motion
o ↓ equinovarus in stance Articulating Plastic AFO
with design that o Many options for hinge types
encompasses more of the o DF & PF stops achieved by
ankle straps, hinge types, and/or
materials abutting
o ↑ gait speed if AFO has
o Good option to allow
less motion restrictions
modifications with recovery
o ↑ static balance if AFO
has more motion
restrictions
Dynamic o ↑ DF in swing o PF spasticity o Material property and/or Carbon fiber AFO
Enhances or resists o ↑ Push-off force (≥MAS 3) spring choices assist, restrict o Stores & releases force for
ankle motion while o Allows for volitional o Equinovarus or allow motion push-off
allowing some muscle activation o Knee buckling o AFO set in DF leads to knee o Minimal medial/lateral
motion and/or o Possible ↑ stance phase o Genu recurvatum flexion in stance support at ankle
energy storage knee flexion or extension o ↓ ankle PROM o AFO set in PF leads to knee o Minimal to no adjustability
by supporting sagittal extension in stance
plane ankle motion Articulating AFO, DF assist
o Possible ↓ equinovarus in o Free DF with some DF assist
stance with design that from this hinge
encompasses more of the o PF stop created by contact of
ankle shells posteriorly
o ↑ gait speed o Pin or longer shells can be
used posteriorly for more PF
restriction
Copyright Academy of Neurologic Physical Therapy, printed in Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy: April 2021-Volume 45 – Issue 2 – p112-196 ANPT Knowledge Translation Task Force: Elizabeth Cornforth, PT, DPT,
NCS; Bobbette Miller, DPT, NCS; Therese Johnston, PT, PhD; Lisa Brown, PT, DPT, NCS; Andrea Ecsedy, PT, DPT, NCS; Megan Greenwood, PT, DPT, MSPT, NCS, PCS; Ryan Koter, PT, DPT; Suzanne O'Neal, PT, DPT, DHSc, NCS;
Katherine Sweet, PT, DPT, NCS; Daniel Miner, PT, DPT
www.neuropt.org

References:
1. Folmar E, Jennings H, Lusardi MM. Chapter 9: Principles of Lower Extremity Orthoses. In: hui KK, Jorge M, Yen S-C. Lusardi MM. Orthotics and prosthetics in rehabilitation (4th ed). St.
Louis, MO: Elsevier; 2020:220-258.
2. Fox JR, Lovegreen W. Chapter 22: Lower Limb Orthoses. In: Webster JB, Murphy DP, eds. Atlas of Orthoses and Assistive Devices (Fifth Edition). Elsevier; 2019:239-246.e1
3. Hou J, Fortson BD, Lovegreen W, Fox JR. Chapter 28: Lower Limb Orthoses for Persons Who Have Had a Stroke. In: Webster JB, Murphy DP, eds. Atlas of Orthoses and Assistive Devices
(Fifth Edition). Elsevier; 2019:289-295.e1
4. Johnston TE, Keller S, Denzer-Weiler C, Brown L. A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Use of Ankle-Foot Orthoses and Functional Electrical Stimulation Post-Stroke. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2021
Apr 1;45(2):112-196. doi: 10.1097/NPT.0000000000000347. PMID: 33675603.
5. May BJ, Lockard MA. Chapter 11: Examinations for Orthotic Prescription and Checkout. In: Prosthetics & Orthotics in Clinical Practice. McGraw Hill; 2011. Accessed April 12, 2022.
https://fadavispt.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?bookid=1865&sectionid=140943030
6. May BJ, Lockard MA. Chapter 12: Designing and Prescribing Orthoses. In: Prosthetics & Orthotics in Clinical Practice. McGraw Hill; 2011. Accessed April 12, 2022:
https://fadavispt.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?bookid=1865&sectionid=140943030
7. May BJ, Lockard MA. Chapter 14: Orthoses for Ankle Impairments. In: Prosthetics & Orthotics in Clinical Practice. McGraw Hill; 2011. Accessed April 12, 2022.
https://fadavispt.mhmedical.com/content.aspx?bookid=1865&sectionid=140943030
8. Rogati G, Caravaggi P, Leardini A. Design principles, manufacturing and evaluation techniques of custom dynamic ankle-foot orthoses: a review study. J Foot Ankle Res. 2022 May
19;15(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s13047-022-00547-2. PMID: 35585544; PMCID: PMC9118871.
9. Totah D, Menon M, Jones-Hershinow C, Barton K, Gates DH. The impact of ankle-foot orthosis stiffness on gait: A systematic literature review. Gait Posture. 2019 Mar;69:101-111. doi:
10.1016/j.gaitpost.2019.01.020. Epub 2019 Jan 15. PMID: 30708092.

You might also like