Current Pedorthics | March-April 2013 | Vol. 45, Issue 2 | Page 29

Table 4 shows the factors patients perceived as important; most commonly identified factors were comfort (98%), fit (90%), support (90%), cost (60%), and weight (63%). Patients reported style (36%) and color (33%) as being less important. Factors influencing changes in foot characteristics and footwear. Shoe width and depth did not correlate with foot pain, impairment, and disability (data not shown). However, patients with poor footwear reported higher foot-related impairment and activities, particularly in the scores of the LSISAP (P = 0.01) and the FFI impairment domain (P = 0.02) (Table 5). Secondary analysis demonstrated no significant differences in any of the footwear characteristics between participants with diabetes mellitus (n = 7) and those without diabetes mellitus (n = 43; P > 0.05). DISCUSSION The aim of this study was to identify current footwear styles, footwear characteristics, and factors that influence footwear choice experienced by patients with chronic gout. Overall, we found severe impairment and limited activity scores, consistent with significant foot disability and impairment associated with gout. A previous study has reported similar findings of foot pain, impairment, and disability relating to chronic gout (7). More than 40% of patients in the current study wore sandals, moccasins, and flip-flops. A previous study (22) reported that gait changes were observed in an asymptomatic population wearing flip-flops and suggested that the shoe construction may contribute to lower extremity leg pain and is counterproductive to alleviating pain. The wearing of open-type footwear should be interpreted with caution in the current study. It is important to understand that open-type footwear, such as flip-flops and sandals, are commonly worn in New Zealand. However, wearing open-type footwear may reflect the issue of finding appropriate footwear, in particular relating to finding footwear that has adequate foot width and length. Analysis of patient footwear illustrated signs of detrimental changes. Minimal motion control was found in the current study and since the midfoot is required to form a rigid lever during propulsion, footwear instability may contribute to foot problems in patients with chronic gout. The current study found more than 50% of shoes with a flexion point distal to the level of the first MTP joint. This may limit gait efficiency due to altered kinematics that result from inhibition of normal first MTP joint function (8). We can postulate that a flexion point proximal may jeopardize the shoe’s stability and may exacerbate the problem of efficient toe-off observed in patients with chronic gout (7). Heel height greater than 2.5 cm has been associated with hallux valgus, plantar callus, and postural instability in older adults (8). In our study, more than 40% of those with high heel height wore athletic shoes. Athletic shoes vary significantly with midsole construction that may use elements of gel, foamed polyurethane, or air chambers that serve to aid cushioning (20). The elevated heel height of athletic shoes may go some way to explain the high heel height observed in this study. The lack of cushioning found in shoes demonstrates the inadequate amount of structural support for the foot and lower extremity. Wear patterns on the footwear provided some indication that they were partially worn, and there were considerable amounts of medial compression signs. The poor midfoot sole stability and poor heel counter stiffness found suggest that the current footwear does not stabilize the foot during walking. The definition of poor shoes (sandals, slippers, and flip-flops) used in this study implies a shoe design with poor fit, poor foot posture, and a lack of shock absorption characteristics. The lack of shock attenuation has the potential to increase loads on plantar tissues, potentially leading to foot pain. Combined with the presence of a flatfoot type, patients with gout wear footwear that gives no support or cushioning and is prone to unstableness. Therefore, footwear that has inadequate stability, poor cushioning, and limited stability may exacerbate foot pain in patients with gout. Table 5. Differences between shoe fit category and foot characteristics Poor shoe category, mean ± SD Good shoe category, mean ± SD P Leeds Foot Impact Scale (impairment) 9.9 ± 6.5 6.5 ± 4.5 0.05 Leeds Foot Impact Scale (activities) 17.2 ± 11.3 8.2 ± 8.7 0.01 Foot Function Index (pain) 43.5 ± 33.7 27.4 ± 22.4 0.07 Foot Function Index (impairment) 45.9 ± 29.2 24.2 ± 26.4 0.02 Foot Function Index (limitation) 24.3  25.3 24.1  26.4 0.20 In the current study, the participants reported that fit and comfort were important factors in choosing footwear, suggesting that patients with gout may prioritize these factors due to their condition. More than one-half of the patients reported cost as a factor contributing to their footwear choice. The wearing of poor shoes may be due to financial restrictions when purchasing footwear. Furthermore, gout is a painful and distressing condition that can have a major impact on economically active adults who may be forced to give up work either temporarily or permanently due to their condition (23,24). These data highlight the barriers related to costs that patients with gout may encounter when purchasing footwear. We found no relationship between foot length and width and Current Pedorthics March/April 2013 27