Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 1, 2026

06:58
A Structured Rehabilitation Protocol for Improved Multifunctional Prosthetic Control: A Case Study
Published on: November 6, 2015
Custom formed orthoses in cycling.
Brendan C O'Neill1, Kenneth Graham, Mark Moresi
1Sydney Sports Medicine Centre, Sydney Olympic Park, Australia. drbo@xtra.co.nz
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
|May 24, 2011
Summary
Custom foot orthoses (CFOs) did not show systematic effects on cycling biomechanics for competitive cyclists. However, CFOs can produce subject-specific changes, suggesting an individualized approach to orthotic prescription is beneficial.
Area of Science:
- Sports Biomechanics
- Orthotics and Prosthetics
Background:
- Custom foot orthoses (CFOs) are frequently prescribed to athletes.
- Their systematic effects on cycling biomechanics, particularly during the power phase, require further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess the effects of prescribed in-shoe CFOs on hip adduction, knee abduction, and tibial internal rotation during the cycling power phase.
- To determine if CFOs produce systematic or subject-specific biomechanical changes in cyclists.
Main Methods:
- A before-and-after crossover study design was employed.
- Twelve competitive cyclists used their prescribed CFOs or no orthoses during stationary cycling.
- Three-dimensional biomechanical data were collected using an 8-camera Vicon system and analyzed with 2-way ANOVA.
Main Results:
- No systematic effects of CFOs on cycling biomechanics were observed.
- A trend towards reduced tibial internal rotation was noted (P<0.072).
- Significant subject-specific biomechanical effects were identified (P<0.05), with three distinct knee movement patterns observed.
Conclusions:
- Currently prescribed CFOs do not systematically alter cycling biomechanics in competitive cyclists.
- CFOs can induce significant subject-specific biomechanical modifications, influenced by rearfoot and/or forefoot wedges.
- An individualized approach to orthotic prescription, considering the forefoot-rearfoot relationship, is recommended.
