S33 Biomechanics Infuence of Foot Orthoses on Plantar Pressures, Foot Pain and Walking Ability of Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients Primož Novak a , Helena Burger a , Črt Marinček a , Gaj Vidmar a , Matija Tomšič b a Institute for Rehabilitation, Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia b Department of Rheumatology, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Slovenia OBJECTIVE The purpose of the study was to compare the impact of func- tional and placebo foot orthoses on plantar pressure distribution, forefoot pain and walking ability in rheumatoid arthritis patients. METHODS Sixty patients with rheumatoid arthritis were randomized to receive placebo orthoses (n=20), functional orthoses with no correction (n=11), minimal correction (n=9) or functional foot orthoses with corrections (n=20). Plantar pressure measure- ment was performed with F–scan system. Pain subscale of the Foot Function Index was used for assessment of foot pain. Walking ability was assessed by the 6–minute walking test. Investigations were performed at baseline, one week after the patient received shoes with orthoses and six months later. RESULTS Plantar pressures were significantly higher at painful than at non–painful foot areas (p<0.05). Notable plantar pressure re- distribution was achieved with foot orthoses, but there were no significant differences between various types of ortoses. Significant reduction of forefoot pain was observed in all groups (p<0.001), whereby the effect increased with time. The differences between groups were not statistically signifi- cant after one week, and were marginally significant after six months (p=0.066). Functional orthoses with no or minimal correction tended to be most efficient and placebo orthoses least efficient. Overall, significant improvement of activity (walking ability) was observed with orthoses (and orthopaed- ic shoes) (p<0.001), but differences between the groups were not statistically significant. Foot pain has significant impact on the walking ability of rheumatoid arthritis patients (p<0.05). Walking distance increases as foot pain decreases, the correla- tion being weak, but significant (r=-0.35). CONCLUSIONS The study showed no clear advantage of functional foot or- thoses over placebo orthoses. KEYWORDS rheumatoid arthritis, foot pain, foot orthoses, insoles, plantar pressure measurement, 6–minute walking tes REFERENCES 1. Hodge MC, Back TM, Carter GM. Novel award 1st prize paper. Orthotic manage- ment of plantar pressure and pain in RA. Clin Biomech 1999; 14: 567–75. 2. Conrad KJ, Budiman–Mak E, Roach KE, Hedeker D. Impacts of foot orthoses on pain and disability in Rheumatoid arthritics. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 1–7. Aim of Digital Motion Analysis to Improve Understanding of Idiopathic Scoliosis Janis Ositis, Zane Pavare, Aivars Vetra National Rehabilitation Centre „Vaivari”, Jurmala, Latvia INTRODUCTION In actual stage of our study we did not find evidences for neu- romuscular origin of idiopathic spine deformity. In some cas- es, changes in motion pattern were most like results of lumbar curves with pelvic torsion, (King curve classification, type 1; 2) not like origin of deformity. OBJECTIVE The AIM of this study was to observe scoliosis subjects in gait lab to identify, collect and analyze asymmetries. Primary hy- pothesis was that patients with significant idiophatic scoliosis (AIS) can have slight neurological dysfunction that was not de- tected in routine examination. Ever statistically significant ir- regularity of lower limb motion or EMG can be as argument for possible dysfunction of spine muscles as origin of deformity. MATERIAL AND METHODS 12 AIS patients was investigated, 11 girl’s one boy. Age range was 12-18 (Mean 15) Deformity range was from 40 to 84 de- grees in main curve (Mean 54) Kinematics were evaluated with VICON equipment, kinetics with AMTI force plate, EMG(electromyography) with Delsys, data computed with visual 3D. Additionally to standard positions of 3-D markers on segments of lower limbs, pelvis and shoulders was marked positions of spinous process T1; T7; T10; L1. Muscles se- lected for EMG were m. erector spine; m. Gluteus medius and maximus, m. Rectus femoris, m. Semitendinosus, m. Biceps femoris, m. Gastrocnemius, and m. Tibialis anterior. In order