I posed a question on the OANDP-L listserv to find out what materials other orthotists choose for UCBLs to treat pes planovalgus (PPV) and to gather thoughts about allowing dynamic movement. There was a wide range of materials selected by those who responded, many of whom specialized in pediatric care. Compliance seemed to be a decision factor, and many practitioners allow some movement while providing the maximum amount of tolerated correction. The literature does not mention rigidity of the device as important, and it seems we have ideologies from very flexible to very rigid for UCBL treatment.
Support authors and subscribe to content
This is premium stuff. Subscribe to read the entire article.
Login if you have purchased
