Comparison of upper limb burn injury versus simulated pathology in terms of gait and footprint parameters.

<bold>Background: </bold>Little is known about whether a simulated upper limb condition reflects a real (burn-injury) upper limb pathology in terms of gait/footprint parameters.<bold>Research Question: </bold>The main aim of this study was to investigate the differences in these parameters between two conditions (real-simulation).<bold>Methods: </bold>The study included burn patients (n = 30) and a control group of 30 healthy subjects. Gait and footprint parameters were evaluated using the GAITRite electronic walkway. Kinesiophobia and pain were assessed with the Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale and Visual Analog Scale, respectively. Gait evaluation of the control group was performed randomly in two conditions:1. Normal arm swing (control group) 2.Elbow flexed at 90° with a bandage (simulated group).<bold>Results: </bold>Step and stride length in the burn group were significantly shorter than in the other groups (p < 0.05). Stance phase was significantly higher while swing phase, velocity and cadence were lower in the burn group (p < 0.05). Peak time in the midfoot for both sides were significantly higher in the burn group (p < 0.05). Peak time in the hindfoot for the affected side was significantly lower while peak time in the hindfoot for the intact side was significantly higher in the burn group compared to the simulated group (p < 0.05). There were significant correlations between pain, kinesiophobia and velocity, and cadence in the burn group (p < 0.05).<bold>Significance: </bold>Compared to the other groups, patients with burn injury have different gait/footprint parameters due to increased pain and kinesiophobia. To determine the effects of upper limb injury and arm swing on gait parameters, a real pathology should be considered rather than a simulated pathology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]