Restoration of Heel–Toe Gait Patterns for the Prevention of Asymmetrical Hip Internal Rotation in Patients with Unilateral Spastic Cerebral Palsy

Abstract

Forward modelling has indicated hip internal rotation as a secondary physical effect to plantar flexion under load. It could therefore be of interest to focus the treatment for patients with unilateral spastic cerebral palsy on achieving a heel–toe gait pattern, to prevent development of asymmetrical hip internal rotation. The aim of this preliminary retrospective cohort investigation was to evaluate the effect of restoring heel–toe gait, through use of functional orthoses, on passive hip internal rotation. In this study, the affected foot was kept in an anatomically correct position, aligned to the leg and the gait direction. In case of gastrosoleus shortness, a heel raise was attached to compensate for the equinus and yet to provide heel–floor contact (mean equinus = −2.6 degrees of dorsiflexion). Differences in passive hip internal rotation between the two sides were clinically assessed while the hip was extended. Two groups were formed according to the achieved correction of their gait patterns through orthotic care: patients with a heel-toe gait (with anterograde rocking) who wore the orthosis typically for at least eight hours per day for at least a year, or patients with toe-walking (with retrograde rocking) in spite of wearing the orthosis who used the orthosis less in most cases. A Student’s t-test was used to compare the values of clinically assessed passive hip rotation (p < 0.05) between the groups and the effect size (Hedges’ g) was estimated. Of the 70 study participants, 56 (mean age 11.5 y, majority GMFCS 1, similar severity of pathology) achieved a heel-toe gait, while 14 remained as toe-walkers. While patients with heel–toe gait patterns showed an almost symmetrical passive hip internal rotation (difference +1.5 degrees, standard deviation 9.6 degrees), patients who kept toe-walking had an increased asymmetrical passive hip internal rotation (difference +10.4 degrees, standard deviation 7.5 degrees; p = 0.001, Hedges’s g = 0.931). Our clinical findings are in line with the indications from forward modelling that treating the biomechanical problem might prevent development of a secondary deformity. Further prospective studies are needed to verify the presented hypothesis.