New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Orthotics

post #1 of 29
Thread Starter 
I am getting orthotics for my street shoes soon. I was planning on getting a second pair made for my ski boots. Does it make a difference if I get orthotics or custom footbeds? The podiatrist getting the orthotics for me is a relative who can them for practically nothing. Thanks.

Scott
post #2 of 29
If you need orthotics for shoes, then you need em for skiing, and they will probably help your skiing a great deal. Mine improve my balance a lot. and they line up your body properly... I had top of the line footbeds made, and they were no where near as good as my orthotics (which are walking ones) for skiing.
post #3 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by ant
If you need orthotics for shoes, then you need em for skiing, and they will probably help your skiing a great deal. Mine improve my balance a lot. and they line up your body properly... I had top of the line footbeds made, and they were no where near as good as my orthotics (which are walking ones) for skiing.
Which orthodics did you get?
post #4 of 29
Thread Starter 
Thanks ant, I guess I'll get a pair of orthotics for my boots then. One more thing... should I get the athletic orthotics for my boots or the regular ones? I'm afraid that the athletic ones will have to much cushion and give me less power transfer. Thanks again.
-Scott
post #5 of 29
the orthotics I got weren't any particular type, they are custom made by the podiatrist's technician. Orthotics are different from footbeds, which are the things made by non-podiatrists, often ski shops.

My orthotics are general purpose ones, made to be in all shoes (although they don't go into women's court shoes). They are not made for skiing, but the performance improvement I get with them in is too great to not use them. My podiatrist videoed me walking and took measurements etc before designing my orthotics, to correct a range of problems right up to my back.

The orthotics were made using plaster casts which the podiatrist took of my feet, with the feet hanging off the table. Even the feet touching the ground sets off the problems which the orthotics are meant to correct. Ski footbeds are usually made with the foot contacting the ground, and so are already accommodating some structural problems.

eg, I have flat feet. Yet the plaster casts had massive arches! The minute my feet press the ground, they start to settle and the arch is compressing. there's a world of difference between orthotics and footbeds.
post #6 of 29
be sure to get a full length orthotic for your ski boots... 3/4 length cast models that are used in normal shoes tend to slide forward in the boot while walking since the entire length of a ski boot sole is rigid.
post #7 of 29
Yeah, my orthotics are 2/3 length, and I have black toenails as a result. I'm going to devise something with foam for next season. (got skiinny ankles so my feet move in the boots enough to cause black toenails.
post #8 of 29
try sticking velcro (the prickly side) on the base of the heel of your 3/4 length thotic. And if that doesn't work, under the front edge too... It works for some depending on what sort of material the liner's base is made from
post #9 of 29
I second the recommendation of full length orthotics rather than the usual 3/4 length. I had a pair of hard plastic orthotics which ended just ahead of the ball of the foot. I just could not stand the feel of the hard plastic and the front edge of the orthotic in my ski boots. They also had a tendency to slide forward putting the arch in the wrong place. Full length custom footbeds made specifically for skiing have worked much better for me even though they were not made by a podiatrist. Take a look at the athletic orthotics. The ones I have seen didn't seem overly soft, although they were flexible so that you could use them comfortably for running.

Jim
post #10 of 29
The ski orthotics will not have as much canting or varus posting as an orthotic for running. Generally the heel post will be more ground down so it can seat in the boot better. I usually make them full length unless there are other factors.
post #11 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by coastalbc
try sticking velcro (the prickly side) on the base of the heel of your 3/4 length thotic. And if that doesn't work, under the front edge too... It works for some depending on what sort of material the liner's base is made from
I'll try this! I have a notion it might be very effective, thanks.
I put the boots' original foot liners back into the boots as this gave a snugger fit, and they are faced with a fuzzy material. So it could be just the thing.
post #12 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by arlingtonskidoc
The ski orthotics will not have as much canting or varus posting as an orthotic for running. Generally the heel post will be more ground down so it can seat in the boot better. I usually make them full length unless there are other factors.

Ant & I both have orthotics for WALKING not running.... I am in pain if I walk more than 10 minutes without them.... Ant was hobbling before she got hers... we both have the same podiatrist but very different orthotics in design & materials etc as far as we can compare without seeing them....

My left foot could hardly be ground down more in the heel... it already is ground right out....
Grinding out the right would defeat the purpose of the orthotic

Can you explain further please? I do not get any of this as I have seen it work...
post #13 of 29
Here's my orthotic question:

If I get an orthotic made that lifts my fallen met head to relieve the pressure on my neuroma...and later have the neuroma treated surgically, would S.O.P. suggest that even with the neuroma removed, the fallen met head would still be fallen and the neuroma would re-occur unless I wore the same (or similar) orthotic for life, raising the met head and relieving pressure on the nerve?
post #14 of 29
My thinking would be that even with the scar tissue removed the underlying problem that created the scar tissue would still exist to some extent. Opening up more room for the nerve to prevent future aggravation would be a good thing.
post #15 of 29
With the ski vs street shoe orthotics I have had better luck with more support for the ski orthotic. The walking/running unit is designed to accomodate a certain amount of pronation which serves the purpose of impact absorption in these activities. For skiing the impact is less an issue but a strong ankle position to resist the forces generated 1.5m+ of steel and fibreglass strapped to your foot is far more important.

This will produce many cries of locking the ankle I'm sure but if your foot structure is lax enough to need the street shoe orthotic is becomes difficult to support the foot so much that you are impinging ankle movement altogether. Some ankle movement is a good thing but that movement occuring in a strong range and not reaching collapse is the important issue for a weak structure.

Your foot may be somewhat rigid and need the support for other reasons but it is worth chatting this over with your relative/doctor so he thinks about the ski vs walk implications. Ant is right if you need them for street shoes they will help hugely in ski boots. The street ones will help lots. A more ski specific unit may well be better still.
post #16 of 29
L7 - my orthotics are made to help my feet & ankles MOVE... that is why I had so much pain when i got them - my feet are NOT used to movement.... so by the end of the day when I took the orthotics off my ankle/calf muscles & the foot would spend he night screaming their indignity at having to WORK!

ie my feet are too rigid & locked due to the problems they have....

They do not need support they need CORRECTION - can you explain again for me (I still do not get it) how you can build a corrective orthotic when they are cast with the thing to be corrected already occuring because the foot is weighted?
post #17 of 29
We're all different. L7 has made some great posts in this thread and the custom footbeds thread. He doesn't seem to be advocating weighted molding for skier with flat feet (my problem). For pronation, correction and support are the same thing. Not for other conditions though.
post #18 of 29
here is the dope.
Street shoe ortho's are made for a gaited stride(heel strike).
Vs ski boots, Fixed foot.
one allowes some flex and roll needed in walking and the other holds the foot in place.
now there is some talk in useing/ adding foot roll in ortho's used in snow sports.
but thats a whole diffrebt thread.
post #19 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by telerod15
We're all different. L7 has made some great posts in this thread and the custom footbeds thread. He doesn't seem to be advocating weighted molding for skier with flat feet (my problem). For pronation, correction and support are the same thing. Not for other conditions though.
ahhh the posteing of the foot debate...a varsis wedege is the place to start...making a temp ortho with a Varis wedege and checking how it places the foot in talis netural might bring back some degree of shape back to the arch.
But over doing the padding in the scafiod area of the foot might only bring pain to the flat footed!
post #20 of 29
Thanks for explaining that, Bling Bling!

Actually it makes some sense guessing definitions from context. Remember though, few of us are podiatrists! Yes, unweighted cast orthotics hurt my arches some but eased problems at the knee and ski. I'm more worried about patellar femoral syndrome (and poor skiing!) than arch pain. I'm using orthotics made with weighted feet for everything now, but I think the unweighted ones (I wore them out) had benefits, especially for skiing.
post #21 of 29
Bling and Telerod are both expanding on the ideas I'm talking about. Disski I'm only trying to explain how it could work or maybe should work but none of it is going to walk for everyone. From the sounds of it you have enough going on that you should be dealing strictly at a medical level and if you came to me that is what I would likely tell you. There are a handful of bootfit guys out there that may be able to help you out but I think any of the best would be suggesting the professional route is best in your case.

It still gets down to the same thing. It's not the system as much as it is the operator. Part of it is the operator knowing the system or his or her own limitations in more complex cases. I seem to recall you're a pharmicist so my guess you can get directed to the best of medical advice easily.
post #22 of 29
L7 - I agree & that is why I am following my podiatrists advice & skiing with the orthotics.... (Most of the bootfitters I trust agree with that too) ....

trouble is EVERY time I post anything here (or ant does) we are bombarded with the "don 't use walking orthotics for skiing" mantra......

I want to know HOW a weighted cast footbed can possibly correct my foot -the podiatrists all swear it cannot but the bootfitters etc on here all seem convinced it can.

Also you keep saying that using the amfit system it is possible to make a corrective footbed for my foot.... I am truely trying to understand this.... as I said my podiatrists (all 3 of them) have all insisted my feet must be cast unweighted..... I understand what they tell me as to the why....

NOW I am trying to understand why you belive the amfit system can produce a correct result?
post #23 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bling Skier
here is the dope.
Street shoe ortho's are made for a gaited stride(heel strike).
Vs ski boots, Fixed foot.
one allowes some flex and roll needed in walking and the other holds the foot in place.
now there is some talk in useing/ adding foot roll in ortho's used in snow sports.
but thats a whole diffrebt thread.
How does this match with the fact that my ski instructor taught me to PRONATE an supinate my feet in skiing & it sure feels like they do both that & transfer weight along the foot when I do better quality long turns? ie it does not feel so very different to when I walk (short turns are too fast for me to understand the message from feet)

Also RICK (Fastman) posted that stuff about the foot acting much as it does in walking during a long turn....(dependant on hips being in correct position I think? yes?)

Also my podiatrist insists my feet need to be corrected to be able to have a snowflakes chance in hell of me being able to maintain weight over the inside edge of the foot (the foot never pronates when it walks it does not know how to)
post #24 of 29
I guess the nice thing about this situation, is that if people have proper walking orthotics, it doesn't take much for them to just stick them in their boots and see what happens. That's what I did. I was a bit dubious, as the orthotics are plastic, the arch is hollow (for flexing when walking) and there's a massive hard post up under the heel (to push the bones up into the ankle properly). but I couldn't believe the amazing balance I got, and how I could get an edge so effortlessly, not to mention the lack of achillies pain.
post #25 of 29
not all street shoe orthotics have a high rearfoot post]
post #26 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski

They do not need support they need CORRECTION - can you explain again for me (I still do not get it) how you can build a corrective orthotic when they are cast with the thing to be corrected already occuring because the foot is weighted?

this is the easy way out: have someone stand on a mold in a weight bearing position & then attempt to post the bottom of the mold. Mostly/most commonly posting on the inside of the foot. This is also most commomly performed because it is easy, less skilled, quicker & avoids crossing the line of when does a foot bed become an orthotic (legal issue ie prescribed peice of medical equiptment). It can also be done in a ski shop & most othe the pre-fab materals are set up to be done this way.

molding a foot in non weight-bearing, non-wieght bearing correction, or nwb plus then using posting to do the final touches (50-50 approach) is way more complicated.
post #27 of 29
Is there a way to get one's NWB, medical orthotics duplicated as a ski boot foot bed? Is the best thing to do, to hand those orthotics to your certified pedorthist/bootfitter guru and let him do magic with your othotics as one data point, what he knows about bootfitting and footbeds as another?
post #28 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
L7 - I agree & that is why I am following my podiatrists advice & skiing with the orthotics.... (Most of the bootfitters I trust agree with that too) ....

trouble is EVERY time I post anything here (or ant does) we are bombarded with the "don 't use walking orthotics for skiing" mantra......

I want to know HOW a weighted cast footbed can possibly correct my foot -the podiatrists all swear it cannot but the bootfitters etc on here all seem convinced it can.

Also you keep saying that using the amfit system it is possible to make a corrective footbed for my foot.... I am truely trying to understand this.... as I said my podiatrists (all 3 of them) have all insisted my feet must be cast unweighted..... I understand what they tell me as to the why....

NOW I am trying to understand why you belive the amfit system can produce a correct result?
Although I didn't quote the initial poster here my response was to his query. What I later responded was he should at least discuss this approach with his orthotist/pedorthist/podiatrist. His situation sounds quite different than yours and I still think my suggestion is likely to be the right approach for him.

What I described to you was what should be the protocal for the system to work for you. However that is what SHOULD work but may not work when seen up close and personal and not over the internet. I do not mean to supply a mantra of walking and skiing footbeds are different but OFTEN even usually they are. Most design of footbeds is developed around gait. This is not the same as skiing demands and this should USUALLY be reflected in the ideal appliances for either. The medical community seldom recognizes this difference.

To contrast your experience what I often get is people saying 'this is what works for me so this is what's best for everyone'. Or 'this system doesn't work for me therefore it universally sucks'. What I say repeatedly is all (most) systems can work very well but the important thing is who is using them. One of the most important aspects of this person is their ability to recognize and adapt to various needs of the clients. In more complex situations (yours I'm guessing) I have no reservations of telling people they are better off taking a medical approach. I have often said a windlass test should always be performed to assess the rigidity of the mid foot and that taken into consideration of how much support should exist and whether the support occurs mostly at the mid foot or rear foot.

Again my initial responses weren't aimed at you and my explanations to you of what COULD work were not meant to be a definitive response to your situation but only the possibility of what might do it. It would be interesting to actually see your situation and again I doubt I would be the guy selling you on something that just wouldn't work.
post #29 of 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by disski
How does this match with the fact that my ski instructor taught me to PRONATE an supinate my feet in skiing & it sure feels like they do both that & transfer weight along the foot when I do better quality long turns? ie it does not feel so very different to when I walk (short turns are too fast for me to understand the message from feet)

Also RICK (Fastman) posted that stuff about the foot acting much as it does in walking during a long turn....(dependant on hips being in correct position I think? yes?)

Also my podiatrist insists my feet need to be corrected to be able to have a snowflakes chance in hell of me being able to maintain weight over the inside edge of the foot (the foot never pronates when it walks it does not know how to)
Weighted vs un weighted.....Shops use and promote the system they sell so if a shop only sells product that uses a weighed system or unweighted, thats what you get.
Using an unweighted system tends to allow the maker to vue the foot in a natural position.
where a weighted system points out the problems that occur while....ummmm the foot is weighted.
and corrections are made from knee down( in most cases)
I have made foot beds using both systems and find that using a unweighted system is easer to do.(crush box)
and the weighted takes more time to set up.
Using eather system, I found gets the same results.
Let me add this....i have found that 50% of the people that I have made FB'S 4 ski them and don't come back 4 fine tuneing.
The foot beds that I made for my self are made out of leather.
i use various density leather and post it with a hard rubber.
The ones i make in the shop are made from a blank that is heated and molded to the foot then tweeked using a grinder.

as 4 putting the weight on the skis edege I have found that using cant wedeges placed under the binding is the best rute to follow. a foot bed is a foundation to keep the foot from sup/pronateing.
and wedeges are used to further alline the leg up to the hip.(yes cuff angle adjustments also come into play when fine tuneing).
hoe this helped Paul Elliott.


one mo ting...
"Also my podiatrist insists my feet need to be corrected to be able to have a snowflakes chance in hell of me being able to maintain weight over the inside edge of the foot (the foot never pronates when it walks it does not know how to)"

I don't get what the meaning of that quote.
using todays shaped skis one uses both the inside/outside edeges of both skis.IE: long leg/short leg edeging.
Setting up a boot so it only uses the inside edeges imo is so old school.
the next time you see him bring up this situation in conversation.
later PE.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ski Gear Discussion