'A good fit?' Bringing the sociology of footwear to the clinical encounter in podiatry services: a narrative review

Footwear characteristics and foot problems in community dwelling people with stroke: a cross-sectional observational study

PURPOSE

To explore footwear characteristics and foot problems in community dwelling people with stroke as most research to date focused on the general elderly population.

METHODS

Thirty people with mild to moderate stroke (nine men, mean age 68, mean time since onset 67 months) attended a single session to assess footwear and foot problems using established podiatry foot (wear) and ankle assessments.

RESULTS

Most participants wore slippers indoors (n = 17, 57%) and walking shoes outdoors (n = 11, 37%). Over half wore unsupportive ill-fitting shoes indoors and 47% of outdoor shoes fitted badly. All participants had foot problems (mean 6.5 (3.1), 95% CI: 5.4-7.7), including impaired single limb heel raise (93%), reduced range of movement (77%), sensation (47%), and muscle strength (43%). Many had foot-pain, hallux valgus (both 50%), or swollen feet (40%). Foot problems were associated with reduced balance confidence, activity, and community participation (all p < 0.05). A greater proportion of fallers (13/16) than non-fallers (4/14) reported foot problems (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Many community-dwelling people with stroke wore poorly fitting shoes; all had foot problems. Foot problems were linked to reduced mobility. Finding more effective pathways to support people with stroke to select supportive, well-fitting indoor and outdoor footwear is indicated.Implications for rehabilitationPeople with stroke often wear unsupportive ill-fitting shoes and experience foot problems.Assessment of foot problems and footwear advice should be considered during stroke rehabilitation particularly when interventions target fall prevention or improvements in balance and mobility.Information on appropriate footwear and signposting that new shoe purchases should include measuring feet to ensure a good fit is recommended.

Children should be seen and also heard: an explorative qualitative study into the influences on children's choice of footwear, their perception of comfort and the language they use to describe footwear experiences

BACKGROUND

Footwear has an essential role including protection of the feet, overall performance, foot health and potentially, supporting normal development of the foot. In addition to these physical aspects which may influence choice of footwear design, there are psychological influences on what a person chooses to wear. The concept of footwear 'comfort' spans physical and psychological perceptions of comfort in adults. However, there is little understanding of what influences children's footwear choices, how children perceive footwear comfort, or the language used to describe footwear experiences. Therefore, this study aimed to explore these three parameters as the first step to informing the development of a scale to measure footwear comfort in children.

METHODS

A pragmatic qualitative design with thematic analysis as an analytical approach was implemented. Passive observation and short interviews were carried out with 23 children (aged 1-12 years) at a footwear manufactures headquarters and store. Prompts included shoes being tried on and field-notes were taken relating to verbal and non-verbal communication. Field notes were coded then themes were identified, reviewed and named.

RESULTS

Overall, the children equated comfort to softness. However, influences on footwear choice were multidimensional including aesthetics, psychosocial influences, identified 'comfort' and 'discomfort' areas, practical issues and predictive concerns; all interacting with the age of the child.

CONCLUSIONS

For children, footwear comfort is a complex phenomenon having physical, cognitive, social and emotional developmental components. This can be seen in how the children perceive the 'feel' of the shoe and how the shoe is assessed in the context of how the shoe meets the child's physical and psychosocial developmental needs. In younger children footwear preference is related to idiosyncratic tastes in aesthetics, physical ability and comfort. As children age, societal influences begin to expand the social function of footwear denoting group membership, to include themes that transcend the functional and social function of footwear. The knowledge from this study can inform the development of age group specific tools to evaluate comfort.

Factors associated with type of footwear worn inside the house: a cross-sectional study

Background

In specific populations, including those at risk of falls or foot ulcers, indoor footwear is an important aspect of preventative care. This study aims to describe the indoor footwear worn most over the previous year in a sample representative of the Australian inpatient population, and to explore the sociodemographic, medical, foot condition and foot treatment history factors associated with the indoor footwear worn.

Methods

This was a secondary analysis of data collected from inpatients admitted to five hospitals across Queensland, Australia. Sociodemographic information, medical history, foot conditions and foot treatment history were collected as explanatory variables. Outcomes included the self-reported type of indoor footwear (from 16 standard footwear types) worn most in the year prior to hospitalisation, and the category in which the self-reported footwear type was defined according to its features: 'protective', 'non-protective' and 'no footwear'. Multivariate analyses determined explanatory variables independently associated with each type and category.

Results

Protective footwear was worn by 11% of participants (including 4% walking shoes, 4% running shoes, 2% oxford shoes), and was independently associated with education above year 10 level (OR 1.78, p = 0.028) and having had foot treatment by a specialist physician (5.06, p = 0.003). Most participants (55%) wore non-protective footwear (including 21% slippers, 15% thongs/flip flops, 7% backless slippers), which was associated with older age (1.03, p < 0.001). No footwear was worn by 34% of participants (30% barefoot, 3% socks only). Those of older age (0.97, p < 0.001) and those in the most disadvantaged socioeconomic group (0.55, p = 0.019) were less likely to wear no footwear (socks or barefoot).

Conclusions

Only one in nine people in a large representative inpatient population wore a protective indoor footwear most of the time in the previous year. Whilst having education levels above year 10 and having received previous foot treatment by a specialist physician were associated with wearing protective footwear indoors, the presence of a range of other medical and foot conditions were not. These findings provide information to enable clinicians, researchers and policymakers to develop interventions aimed at improving indoor footwear habits that may help prevent significant health burdens such as falls and foot ulcers.