Search

Background: The FED method (Fixation, Elongation, Derotation) is a treatment method approach to Patients with scoliosis. The FED method is especially established in Spain and Poland, whereby in Germany it is less well-known. Nevertheless the FED method is within the scope of a research project (Project Number: 19200 BR/3). The purpose of the paper is to characterize the FED method and to highlight the specificities in contrast to the Schroth method, which is international established and especially in Germany., Methods: This systematic literature research was conducted in Nov 2017-Jan 2018. Therefore common medical and physiotherapeutic databases were used. Furthermore there was a hand search in selected scientific journals. Only a small number of relevant references were identified. That is why the respective authors were asked to provide the full-texts of their papers and to recommend further references., Results: A total of 378 references were identified. After removing duplicates and the content-related selection, 19 references were deemed to be relevant. Based on the analysis of this relevant literature, the FED method was comprehensively characterized. First of all the general structure of the FED method and the scientific evidence for its effectiveness was described. And as a result of the literature research, the operating principles of the FED method were pointed out. Then these operating principles were discussed in comparison with the Schroth method. The Schroth method based on sensomotoric and kinesthetic principles and the correction of the pathologic posture was performed by selective muscle activation and breathing-pattern. Thus, the posture correction will be performed by the patients (auto correction). Compared to the Schroth method, the FED method implements the posture correction by the FED-device. This correction is influenced by mechanical forces with a comparatively high strength and intensity. The repetitive mechanical correction stimulates the sensomotoric system. And due to trophic/biochemical adaptations, the physiological bone growth will be stimulated., Conclusion: In total the authors want to clarify, that both treatment methods (Schroth method, FED method) supposed to be applied in consideration of the preconditions of the patients and the pursue of the different treatment goals. Thus, the implementation of treatment methods should be used according to the individual treatment demand and on different stages in the treatment process., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they collaborated on a research project during the last 3 years. They have received public support for their research from external funding by the AiF (Research Network for Small and Medium-Sized Businesses) – supported by the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi) (reference number: 19200 BR/3). Die Autoren geben an, dass sie innerhalb der letzten 3 Jahre in einem Forschungsprojekt zusammenarbeiten. Das Forschungsprojekt wurde durch öffentliche Gelder finanziert durch den Förderträger AiF (Forschungsnetzwerk für Klein und Mittelständische Unternehmen) – Unterstützt durch das Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWi) (Förderkennzeichen: 19200BR/3)., (Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Objective: Do patients with bi- or trimalleolar ankle injury show differences in motor skills and safety in comparison with healthy, active, age-matched control subjects?, Study Design: Prospective controlled cross-sectional study., Methods: Inclusion of 17 patients with bi- or trimalleolar ankle injury (mean 1.5 years postsurgery) and 23 healthy, active subjects of comparable age (fitness studio). Measurement instruments: motor test procedures and questionnaires., Results: Comparison of patients and control subjects by routine daily motor function: patients < controls with the "timed 'Up & Go' test" (TUG, p = 0.011), the chair rising test and a coordination test using a gymnastic hoop (CRT and GR p > 0.05), fear of falling: patients > controls (p = 0.003) and physical activity: patients < controls (p = 0.032)., Conclusion: There were no significant motor deficits in activities of daily life between the patients and controls, only tendencies; however, the patients showed definite limitations with an increased fear of falling and a reduced physical activity compared with the healthy control group. The resulting differences should be positively influenced by appropriate enhancement of training or participation in sports courses. The aim is to achieve a similar quality of life by a perception of safety and trust in one's own motor skills.