Skip to main content
OrthoVellum
Knowledge Hub

Study

  • Topics
  • MCQs
  • ISAWE
  • Operative Surgery
  • Flashcards

Company

  • About Us
  • Editorial Policy
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA
  • Refund Policy

Support

  • Help Center
  • Accessibility
  • Report an Issue
OrthoVellum

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not affiliated with the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Orthotic Prescription Principles

Back to Topics
Contents
0%

Orthotic Prescription Principles

Comprehensive guide to orthotic prescription for FRACS exam preparation including nomenclature, biomechanics, AFO types, spinal orthoses, and clinical applications

complete
Updated: 2026-01-08
High Yield Overview

ORTHOTIC PRESCRIPTION PRINCIPLES

Control | Correct | Compensate | Protect

3 CsFunctions
AFOMost common LL
TLSOMost common spine
3-PointCorrection principle

Orthosis Nomenclature (ISO Standard)

AFO
PatternAnkle-Foot Orthosis - crosses ankle joint
TreatmentFoot drop, ankle instability, spasticity
KAFO
PatternKnee-Ankle-Foot Orthosis - crosses knee and ankle
TreatmentQuadriceps weakness, knee instability
TLSO
PatternThoracolumbosacral Orthosis - covers T-L-S spine
TreatmentThoracolumbar fractures, scoliosis

Critical Must-Knows

  • Functions: Control (motion), Correct (deformity), Compensate (weakness), Protect (healing)
  • Three-point pressure = biomechanical basis of all corrective orthoses
  • AFO types: Solid (blocks motion), Hinged (allows DF), Ground-reaction (extends knee)
  • FRAFO = Floor Reaction AFO - uses ground reaction force to extend knee
  • Spinal orthoses named by levels covered (LSO, TLSO, CTLSO)

Examiner's Pearls

  • "
    Solid AFO for spastic equinus (blocks plantarflexion)
  • "
    Hinged AFO allows tibial progression in stance (better gait)
  • "
    Ground-reaction AFO for crouch gait (knee extension moment)
  • "
    TLSO for thoracolumbar fractures (T9-L3 coverage)
  • "
    Halo vest = only reliable cervical immobilization (greater than 90%)

Critical Orthotic Concepts for Exam

Three-Point Pressure

Foundation of all corrective orthoses. Central corrective force opposed by two counter-forces creates moment arm. Longer lever arm = greater mechanical advantage. Pressure must be distributed over large area to avoid skin breakdown.

AFO Selection

Solid AFO: Blocks all motion - for spasticity, severe instability. Hinged AFO: Allows dorsiflexion - for weak dorsiflexors with intact plantarflexors. Ground-reaction: Creates knee extension - for crouch gait, quad weakness.

TLSO Limitations

TLSO controls T9 to L3 motion effectively. Above T9 requires CTLSO (sternal and clavicular support). Below L3 requires thigh extension for pelvic control. Upper cervical requires halo vest.

Prescription Essentials

Prescription must specify: Diagnosis, joints to control, motion to allow/block, corrective forces needed, material (plastic, metal, carbon fiber), footwear requirements.

At a Glance

Orthoses are externally applied devices used to control, correct, compensate for, or protect musculoskeletal dysfunction. Understanding orthotic prescription is essential for orthopaedic surgeons managing neurological conditions, fractures, deformity correction, and rehabilitation. The fundamental biomechanical principle underlying corrective orthoses is three-point pressure - a central corrective force opposed by two counter-forces creating a moment for correction. Orthoses are named systematically by the joints they cross (AFO, KAFO, TLSO) following ISO 8549 nomenclature. AFO selection depends on the specific gait abnormality: solid AFO blocks spastic plantarflexion, hinged AFO allows controlled dorsiflexion while preventing foot drop, and ground-reaction AFO creates a knee extension moment for crouch gait. Spinal orthoses provide varying degrees of motion restriction based on their extent - LSO controls lumbosacral motion, TLSO extends to thoracolumbar junction, and halo vest provides the most reliable cervical immobilization.

Mnemonic

4 CsFunctions of Orthoses

C
Control
Limit unwanted motion (spasticity, instability)
C
Correct
Apply corrective forces to deformity
C
Compensate
Substitute for weak/absent muscles
C
Protect
Allow healing (fractures, post-operative)

Memory Hook:4 Cs = Control, Correct, Compensate, Protect - the four functions of every orthosis!

Nomenclature and Classification

ISO 8549 Nomenclature

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) established a systematic naming convention for orthoses based on the anatomical region and joints crossed.

Lower Limb Orthoses:

  • FO (Foot Orthosis): Insoles, arch supports, metatarsal pads
  • AFO (Ankle-Foot Orthosis): Crosses ankle joint, controls foot position
  • KAFO (Knee-Ankle-Foot Orthosis): Extends from thigh to foot, controls knee
  • HKAFO (Hip-Knee-Ankle-Foot Orthosis): Includes hip joint control
  • KO (Knee Orthosis): Braces for knee instability, unloading

Upper Limb Orthoses:

  • WHO (Wrist-Hand Orthosis): Wrist splints, resting hand orthoses
  • EWHO (Elbow-Wrist-Hand Orthosis): Extends to elbow
  • SEWHO (Shoulder-Elbow-Wrist-Hand Orthosis): Full upper limb

Spinal Orthoses:

  • CO (Cervical Orthosis): Soft/rigid collars
  • CTO (Cervicothoracic Orthosis): Extends to upper thorax
  • CTLSO (Cervicothoracolumbosacral Orthosis): Full spine control
  • TLSO (Thoracolumbosacral Orthosis): Thoracolumbar control
  • LSO (Lumbosacral Orthosis): Lower lumbar and sacral control

Functional Classification

Orthosis Classification by Function

Material Classification

Thermoplastics:

  • Polypropylene: Most common, heat-moldable, durable
  • Low-temperature plastics: Custom-molded at lower temperatures
  • Carbon fiber composites: Lightweight, energy-storing (athletic use)

Metal:

  • Aluminum: Lightweight, adjustable
  • Steel: Heavy-duty, adjustable, traditional KAFOs
  • Titanium: Lightweight, strong (specialty applications)

Soft Materials:

  • Neoprene: Compression, warmth, proprioceptive feedback
  • Foam: Padding, pressure distribution
  • Leather: Traditional, breathable, adjustable

Biomechanical Principles

Three-Point Pressure System

The three-point pressure principle is the fundamental biomechanical concept underlying all corrective orthoses. It creates a bending moment to correct or control deformity.

Components:

  1. Central corrective force: Applied at apex of deformity
  2. Two counter-forces: Applied proximal and distal to central force
  3. Moment arm: Distance between forces determines mechanical advantage

Clinical Application:

  • Longer lever arms = greater mechanical advantage
  • Force distribution over large surface area prevents pressure ulcers
  • Soft tissue tolerance limits maximum corrective force

Examples:

  • TLSO for scoliosis: Lateral pad at curve apex, counter-pads at iliac crest and axilla
  • AFO for equinus: Posterior force at calf, anterior force at tibial crest, foot plate
  • Knee orthosis for valgus: Lateral force at knee, medial forces at thigh and calf

Ground Reaction Force Manipulation

Floor Reaction AFO (FRAFO) and ground-reaction orthoses manipulate the ground reaction force vector relative to joint centers.

Principles:

  • Ground reaction force (GRF) passes through centre of pressure
  • If GRF passes anterior to knee = knee extension moment
  • If GRF passes posterior to knee = knee flexion moment
  • FRAFO positions GRF anterior to knee, extending the knee in stance

Clinical Application in Crouch Gait:

  1. Crouch gait = excessive knee flexion in stance (common in cerebral palsy)
  2. Weak quadriceps cannot maintain knee extension
  3. FRAFO blocks ankle dorsiflexion, moves GRF anterior
  4. External knee extension moment compensates for weak quads

Lever Arm Considerations

Long Lever = Greater Control:

  • KAFO controls knee better than short KO
  • Full-length thigh cuff provides better rotational control
  • Trade-off: Increased weight, reduced function

Short Lever = Greater Mobility:

  • Supramalleolar AFO (SMAFO) allows more tibial motion
  • Short KAFOs allow easier sitting
  • Trade-off: Less control of proximal joints
Mnemonic

SHGFAFO Selection Guide

S
Solid AFO
Spastic equinus - blocks all ankle motion
H
Hinged AFO
Drop foot - allows DF, blocks PF
G
Ground-reaction
Crouch gait - extends knee via GRF
F
FRAFO
Floor reaction - rigid anterior tibial shell

Memory Hook:SHGF = Solid, Hinged, Ground-reaction, FRAFO - know which AFO for which gait problem!

Ankle-Foot Orthoses (AFOs)

Solid Ankle AFO

Design:

  • Rigid plastic shell from below knee to toes
  • Blocks all ankle motion (dorsiflexion and plantarflexion)
  • Foot plate extends to metatarsal heads (or toes for spasticity)

Biomechanics:

  • Prevents ankle plantarflexion in swing (clears foot)
  • Prevents ankle dorsiflexion in stance (may limit tibial progression)
  • Provides mediolateral ankle stability

Indications:

  • Spastic equinus (cerebral palsy, stroke, TBI)
  • Severe ankle instability
  • Complete foot drop with spasticity
  • Fixed equinus contracture (blocks further progression)

Contraindications:

  • Intact plantarflexors (blocks push-off power)
  • Patients requiring squat or stair climbing
  • Skin breakdown risk at calf/anterior tibia

Disadvantages:

  • Blocks tibial progression in stance (short step length)
  • Reduces push-off power (no plantarflexion for propulsion)
  • Compensatory knee hyperextension in mid-stance

Hinged (Articulated) AFO

Design:

  • Posterior leaf spring or rigid uprights with ankle joint
  • Mechanical ankle joint allows dorsiflexion
  • Plantarflexion stop prevents foot drop
  • May include dorsiflexion stop if needed

Biomechanics:

  • Allows tibial progression over fixed foot in stance
  • Blocks plantarflexion to prevent foot drop in swing
  • Preserves eccentric plantarflexor function (controlled lowering)

Indications:

  • Flaccid foot drop (peroneal nerve palsy, L5 radiculopathy)
  • Mild spasticity with intact eccentric control
  • Post-stroke with recovering dorsiflexors
  • Need for squat, stair climbing, uneven terrain

Contraindications:

  • Severe spasticity (will fight against hinge)
  • Mediolateral instability (requires solid design)
  • Fixed contracture (cannot dorsiflex anyway)

Variations:

  • Posterior leaf spring (PLS): Flexible posterior strut, energy-storing
  • Rigid stirrup with ankle joint: Metal, adjustable stops
  • Dorsiflexion-assist spring: Active return to neutral

Ground-Reaction (Floor Reaction) AFO

Design:

  • Solid ankle section set in slight dorsiflexion
  • Anterior tibial shell (pretibial shell)
  • Rigid foot plate extending to metatarsal heads
  • May have posterior opening for donning

Biomechanics:

  • Blocks ankle dorsiflexion in stance
  • Ground reaction force vector moves anterior to knee axis
  • Creates external knee extension moment
  • Substitutes for weak quadriceps

Indications:

  • Crouch gait (cerebral palsy, myelomeningocele)
  • Quadriceps weakness (polio, muscular dystrophy)
  • Knee flexion deformity with ambulatory potential
  • Post-surgical (distal femoral osteotomy) protection

Contraindications:

  • Fixed knee flexion contracture greater than 15-20 degrees
  • Spastic hamstrings (will fight extension moment)
  • Knee hyperextension tendency (will worsen)
  • Poor balance (sudden extension may cause falls)

Prescription Considerations:

  • Ankle set at 5-10 degrees dorsiflexion
  • Requires adequate hip extension to progress over foot
  • May need heel raise on contralateral shoe

FRAFO (Floor Reaction AFO)

Design:

  • Variant of ground-reaction AFO
  • Rigid anterior tibial shell
  • Solid ankle locked in 5-10 degrees dorsiflexion
  • Full-contact anterior shell distributes pressure

Biomechanics:

  • Identical to ground-reaction concept
  • Anterior shell provides reaction surface for tibia
  • Ground reaction force anterior to knee creates extension moment
  • More cosmetic than standard ground-reaction with posterior shell

Specific Features:

  • Often custom-molded for optimal fit
  • Anterior shell provides proprioceptive feedback
  • May incorporate tone-reducing footplate (contoured)
  • Available in carbon fiber for lightweight/dynamic response

Clinical Pearls:

  • Check for adequate hip extension (must progress over AFO)
  • Ensure no fixed knee flexion contracture
  • May need gradual progression from 0 to 5-10 degrees DF
  • Watch for proximal compensation (back pain, hip flexor tightness)

Specialty AFO Types

Supramalleolar Orthosis (SMO):

  • Ends above malleoli, does not cross ankle
  • Controls subtalar/midfoot motion only
  • Indications: Flexible flatfoot, mild pronation, toe-walking
  • Allows full ankle ROM

UCBL (University of California Biomechanics Laboratory):

  • Deep heel cup with medial/lateral flanges
  • Controls hindfoot valgus/varus
  • Indications: Flexible pes planus, posterior tibial tendon dysfunction
  • Does not control ankle

Patellar Tendon Bearing (PTB) AFO:

  • Weight-bearing through patellar tendon
  • Unloads foot and ankle
  • Indications: Charcot foot, tibial nonunion, calcaneal fracture
  • Requires careful fitting to avoid pressure issues

Dynamic AFO (Carbon Fiber):

  • Energy-storing carbon fiber construction
  • Returns energy during push-off
  • Indications: Athletic patients, partial foot drop with push-off needs
  • More expensive, requires specific footwear

Knee-Ankle-Foot Orthoses (KAFOs)

Indications for KAFO

Knee Instability:

  • Quadriceps weakness (polio, muscular dystrophy, SCI)
  • Ligamentous instability with neurological impairment
  • Knee hyperextension with sensation loss

Knee and Ankle Weakness:

  • Combined quadriceps and dorsiflexor weakness
  • Flail limb (complete paralysis below knee)
  • Myelomeningocele with high-level paralysis

Deformity Control:

  • Knee flexion contracture (serial casting with KAFO)
  • Genu varum/valgum with weakness
  • Post-surgical protection

KAFO Components

Thigh Section:

  • Thigh cuff or full-contact thigh shell
  • Length determines rotational control
  • Medial/lateral uprights connect to knee joint

Knee Joint Options:

  • Locked knee: Maximum stability, swing-through gait
  • Drop-lock: Manual unlock for sitting, locks automatically
  • Offset knee joint: Provides hyperextension stability
  • Polycentric knee: More anatomical motion
  • Stance-control (SCKAFO): Locks in stance, free in swing

Ankle-Foot Section:

  • Usually solid ankle or locked dorsiflexion
  • May include adjustable ankle joints
  • Stirrup connects to shoe or molded foot section

Stance-Control KAFO (SCKAFO)

Concept:

  • Knee joint locks automatically during stance phase
  • Unlocks during swing phase for normal knee flexion
  • Combines stability with more natural gait pattern

Mechanisms:

  • Weight-activated locking (extends with axial load)
  • Ankle-motion triggered (ankle DF triggers knee lock)
  • Electronic control (sensors detect gait phase)

Benefits over Locked KAFO:

  • Improved gait pattern (knee flexion in swing)
  • Reduced energy expenditure (10-20% less than locked)
  • Better stair climbing and sitting
  • Improved cosmesis and patient acceptance

Spinal Orthoses

Cervical Orthoses

Soft Collar:

  • Foam collar, minimal motion restriction
  • Proprioceptive reminder, comfort, warmth
  • Indications: Whiplash, minor strain, psychological support
  • Does NOT immobilize - do not use for unstable injuries

Rigid Cervical Collar (Philadelphia, Aspen, Miami J):

  • Two-piece (anterior/posterior) rigid plastic
  • Restricts 70-80% flexion/extension, 50% rotation
  • Indications: Stable cervical fractures, post-operative, transport
  • Does NOT adequately immobilize C0-C2 or C7-T1

Cervicothoracic Orthosis (CTO):

  • Collar with thoracic extension (sternal and posterior plates)
  • Improved control of lower cervical spine (C5-T1)
  • Indications: Lower cervical fractures, post-fusion
  • Examples: SOMI brace, Minerva orthosis

Halo Vest:

  • Ring fixed to skull with 4 pins, connected to vest
  • Most restrictive cervical orthosis available
  • Restricts greater than 90% of cervical motion
  • Indications: Unstable cervical fractures, C1-C2 injuries, post-odontoid fixation
  • Complications: Pin site infection (20%), pin loosening, respiratory compromise

Cervical Motion Restriction by Orthosis Type:

OrthosisFlex/ExtLateral BendRotation
Soft Collar5-10%5%5%
Rigid Collar70-80%50%50%
CTO (SOMI)80-90%60%60%
Halo Vestgreater than 95%greater than 95%greater than 95%

Thoracolumbosacral Orthosis (TLSO)

Design Principles:

  • Rigid shell or corset covering T9 to sacrum
  • Three-point pressure for fracture control
  • Limits flexion, extension, and rotation

Types:

Custom-Molded TLSO:

  • Bivalved (anterior/posterior shells)
  • Total contact fit, best control
  • Indications: Thoracolumbar fractures, scoliosis (night-time)
  • Examples: Boston brace (scoliosis), Jewett equivalent

Prefabricated TLSO:

  • Off-the-shelf with adjustment
  • Faster to apply, less expensive
  • Indications: Stable fractures, compression fractures
  • Examples: CASH brace, Jewett hyperextension brace

Jewett Hyperextension Brace:

  • Three-point system: Sternal pad, pubic pad, posterior pad
  • Extension orthosis (limits flexion only)
  • Indications: Anterior column compression fractures (T6-L3)
  • Does NOT control rotation or lateral bending
  • Contraindicated: Posterior column injury, three-column injury

TLSO Motion Restriction:

  • Flexion/Extension: 50-70% reduction
  • Rotation: 40-50% reduction
  • Lateral bending: 30-40% reduction
  • Best control at T9-L3 levels

Limitations:

  • Cannot control upper thoracic spine (above T8-9)
  • Cannot control L4-S1 without thigh extension
  • Does NOT prevent ALL motion - supplementary rest needed

Lumbosacral Orthosis (LSO)

Indications:

  • Low lumbar fractures (L3-L5)
  • Spondylolysis/spondylolisthesis (conservative management)
  • Post-operative lumbar fusion
  • Mechanical low back pain (short-term)
  • Degenerative conditions with instability

Types:

Corset (Soft LSO):

  • Elastic or canvas with posterior stays
  • Mild support, proprioceptive reminder
  • Increases intra-abdominal pressure
  • Indications: Chronic LBP, muscle spasm, post-operative

Rigid LSO:

  • Plastic or metal frame with abdominal support
  • Better motion restriction than corset
  • Indications: Stable L3-L5 fractures, pars fractures

LSO with Thigh Cuff:

  • Extension to thigh controls pelvis
  • Improves L4-S1 motion restriction
  • Indications: Lower lumbar injuries, L5-S1 fusions

Motion Restriction:

  • Flexion: 30-50% reduction
  • Extension: 30-40% reduction
  • Rotation: 20-30% reduction
  • Less effective than TLSO for overall spine control

Scoliosis Orthoses

Boston Brace (TLSO):

  • Custom-molded or prefabricated
  • Underarm design (cosmetically acceptable)
  • Pads positioned to apply corrective forces
  • Indications: AIS curves 25-45 degrees, apex T7 or below

Milwaukee Brace (CTLSO):

  • Neck ring with occipital and throat pads
  • Pelvic section with uprights to neck ring
  • Indications: High thoracic curves (apex above T7)
  • Largely replaced by underarm braces due to cosmesis

Charleston Bending Brace:

  • Night-time only wear (8-10 hours)
  • Side-bending position (over-correction)
  • Indications: Single lumbar or thoracolumbar curves
  • Better compliance due to night-time only

Providence Brace:

  • Night-time only, supine position
  • Direct lateral and rotational correction
  • Similar indications to Charleston

Bracing Goals:

  • Halt curve progression (not correct curve)
  • Success defined as less than 5 degrees progression
  • Prevent need for surgery
  • Wear 18-23 hours/day for in-brace braces

Evidence:

  • BrACT trial (2013): Bracing effective vs observation for AIS
  • In-brace correction of greater than 50% predicts success
  • Compliance critical: greater than 13 hours/day needed for effect
Mnemonic

CHT LSSpinal Orthosis Levels

C
Cervical (CO)
Collar - C1-C7, limited control
H
Halo
Halo vest - C0-C7, best cervical control
T
TLSO
T9-L3 - thoracolumbar fractures
L
LSO
L3-S1 - lower lumbar injuries
S
Scoliosis
Boston brace apex below T7

Memory Hook:CHT LS = Collar, Halo, TLSO, LSO, Scoliosis - know which orthosis for which spinal level!

Condition-Specific Prescriptions

Neurological Conditions

Stroke (Hemiplegia):

  • Flaccid phase: Hinged AFO (prevent foot drop, allow DF)
  • Spastic phase: Solid AFO if equinus, hinged if mild spasticity
  • Consider tone-reducing features (contoured footplate)
  • Upper limb: Resting hand splint to prevent contracture

Cerebral Palsy:

  • Spastic diplegia: Ground-reaction AFO for crouch gait
  • Spastic hemiplegia: Solid or hinged AFO depending on tone
  • Equinus: Solid AFO, consider serial casting first
  • KAFO rarely tolerated (high energy cost, poor acceptance)

Poliomyelitis/Post-Polio:

  • Flaccid weakness pattern
  • AFO if ankle dorsiflexors weak
  • KAFO if quadriceps weak (locked or stance-control)
  • Lightweight materials preferred (carbon fiber, aluminum)

Spinal Cord Injury:

  • Complete paraplegia: RGO (Reciprocating Gait Orthosis) for therapeutic standing/walking
  • Incomplete injury: AFO or KAFO based on muscle power
  • High energy cost limits practical ambulation

Fractures

Tibial Shaft Fracture:

  • PTB cast or PTB AFO for protected weight-bearing
  • Functional brace (Sarmiento) after initial healing
  • Allow knee and ankle motion while protecting tibia

Ankle Fracture (Post-Operative):

  • CAM walker (Controlled Ankle Motion) boot
  • Allows protected weight-bearing
  • Removable for wound care and physiotherapy

Thoracolumbar Fracture:

  • TLSO for stable burst or compression fractures
  • Duration: 8-12 weeks typically
  • Custom-molded for unstable patterns
  • Jewett brace for anterior column only

Cervical Fracture:

  • Halo vest for unstable C1-C2 injuries
  • Rigid collar for stable subaxial injuries
  • Duration: 8-12 weeks for halo

Paediatric Conditions

Developmental Dysplasia of Hip:

  • Pavlik harness (0-6 months): Hip flexion and abduction
  • Abduction orthosis (after Pavlik): Maintain hip position
  • Not for exam focus but understand principles

Clubfoot (Post-Correction):

  • Denis Browne boots and bar (Ponseti protocol)
  • Boots set in external rotation and dorsiflexion
  • Maintains correction achieved by casting
  • Wear 23 hours/day for 3 months, then night-time

Blount Disease:

  • KAFO with valgus force at knee
  • Theoretical benefit in infantile Blount (less than 3 years)
  • Limited evidence for efficacy

Evidence Base

BrACT Trial - Bracing for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

1
Key Findings:
  • RCT of bracing vs observation for AIS curves 25-40 degrees
  • Bracing significantly reduced progression to surgery (28% vs 52%, NNT=4)
  • Greater wear time correlated with better outcomes (dose-response)
  • Success rate 72% with bracing vs 48% observation
  • Terminated early due to clear benefit of bracing
Clinical Implication: Bracing is effective for moderate AIS curves and should be offered to skeletally immature patients with curves 25-40 degrees.
Source: N Engl J Med 2013

AFO Effectiveness in Stroke - Cochrane Review

1
Key Findings:
  • Systematic review of RCTs examining AFO use in stroke patients
  • AFOs improve walking speed (mean 0.08 m/s improvement)
  • Reduce energy expenditure during walking
  • Improve walking independence on functional scales
  • Optimal AFO type depends on individual gait pattern
Clinical Implication: AFOs are effective for improving gait in stroke patients. Selection should be based on individual assessment of gait abnormality and spasticity.
Source: Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017

Spinal Orthoses for Thoracolumbar Fractures - Systematic Review

2
Key Findings:
  • Review of orthosis use for thoracolumbar burst/compression fractures
  • No high-quality RCTs comparing bracing vs no bracing
  • TLSO reduces segmental motion by 50-70%
  • Jewett brace controls flexion only, not rotation
  • Custom TLSO provides better control than prefabricated
Clinical Implication: While orthoses are widely used for thoracolumbar fractures, high-quality evidence for efficacy is lacking. Clinical practice based on biomechanical principles and expert consensus.
Source: Spine 2014

Ground-Reaction AFO for Crouch Gait in Cerebral Palsy

2
Key Findings:
  • Prospective study of GRAFO in CP patients with crouch gait
  • Knee extension in stance improved by mean 12 degrees
  • Oxygen cost of walking reduced by 15%
  • Improved Gillette Gait Index scores
  • Hip extension must be adequate for GRAFO to work
Clinical Implication: GRAFOs effectively improve knee extension in crouch gait when adequate hip extension is present. Patient selection is critical for success.
Source: Gait Posture 2012

Cervical Orthosis Motion Restriction - Comparative Study

3
Key Findings:
  • In vivo radiographic study comparing cervical orthosis effectiveness
  • Halo vest restricts 96% of total cervical motion (most effective)
  • Rigid collars (Philadelphia, Miami J) restrict 50-70% of motion
  • Soft collars provide minimal restriction (less than 15%)
  • Upper cervical (C0-C2) poorly controlled by collars - requires halo or CTO
Clinical Implication: Collar selection must match injury pattern. Soft collars provide comfort only. Rigid collars for stable injuries. Halo vest for unstable cervical injuries requiring maximal immobilization.
Source: Spine 2001

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 1: AFO Prescription for Stroke Patient

EXAMINER

"A 65-year-old man is 3 months post-stroke with left hemiplegia. He has MRC grade 2 ankle dorsiflexors, grade 3 plantarflexors, and mild ankle spasticity (Modified Ashworth Scale 1+). He is currently walking with a quad cane and foot drop. What orthosis would you prescribe and why?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This patient has post-stroke hemiplegia with residual weakness and mild spasticity. The key gait problems are **foot drop in swing phase** (weak dorsiflexors grade 2) and **potential for ankle instability**. The plantarflexors retain some power (grade 3), which is important for push-off. The spasticity is mild (MAS 1+), not severe. For this patient, I would prescribe a **hinged AFO** rather than a solid AFO. The hinged AFO provides a **plantarflexion stop** to prevent foot drop during swing phase, allowing him to clear his foot from the ground. Importantly, it **allows controlled dorsiflexion in stance**, permitting tibial progression over the fixed foot - this is essential for a more normal gait pattern and preserves the remaining plantarflexor function for push-off. A solid AFO would block all ankle motion, which would: (1) prevent use of his remaining plantarflexor power for push-off, (2) limit tibial progression causing shortened step length, and (3) potentially cause compensatory knee hyperextension. The mild spasticity (MAS 1+) is not severe enough to require a solid AFO - the hinge can accommodate this. If spasticity were severe (MAS 3-4), causing strong equinus thrust, I would reconsider toward a solid AFO to block the spastic plantarflexion. Additional prescription considerations include: fitting the AFO for use inside his existing shoes, ensuring adequate heel support, and reviewing with physiotherapy for gait training with the new device. I would review him at 2-4 weeks to assess fit, skin integrity, and gait pattern.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Hinged AFO for foot drop with intact plantarflexors - preserves push-off
Solid AFO blocks all motion - use for severe spasticity or instability
Mild spasticity (MAS 1-2) can be managed with hinged AFO
Tibial progression in stance requires ankle dorsiflexion - solid AFO limits this
COMMON TRAPS
✗Prescribing solid AFO for all stroke patients (loses plantarflexor function)
✗Ignoring remaining muscle power when selecting AFO type
✗Not considering spasticity severity in AFO selection
✗Forgetting to assess footwear compatibility
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What if his spasticity worsens to MAS 3 at follow-up - would you change the AFO?"
"How would your prescription differ if he had no plantarflexor power (grade 0)?"
"What is the role of tone-reducing features in AFO design?"
VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 2: Spinal Orthosis for Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture

EXAMINER

"A 55-year-old woman fell from a ladder and sustained an L1 burst fracture. CT shows 40% anterior height loss, 25% canal compromise, intact posterior ligamentous complex (no widening of interspinous distance), and she is neurologically intact. The spine surgeon has decided on conservative management. What orthosis would you prescribe?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is a stable L1 burst fracture suitable for conservative management. The key features indicating stability are: **intact posterior ligamentous complex** (no interspinous widening, no facet subluxation), neurologically intact, and the injury pattern is primarily anterior column (burst with anterior height loss). For conservative management of thoracolumbar burst fractures, I would prescribe a **TLSO (Thoracolumbosacral Orthosis)** - specifically a custom-molded bivalved TLSO or well-fitted prefabricated TLSO. The goals of bracing are to: (1) **limit spinal motion** to allow fracture healing, (2) **reduce load on the anterior column** by sharing load with the orthosis, and (3) **maintain sagittal alignment** preventing progressive kyphosis. TLSO is appropriate because L1 is within the effective range of TLSO control (**T9-L3**). The orthosis works through three-point pressure: anterior abdominal compression, posterior thoracolumbar support, and pelvic counterforce. I would NOT prescribe a Jewett hyperextension brace in this case because Jewett braces control **flexion only** (single-plane control). A burst fracture with posterior wall involvement has some degree of circumferential injury pattern, and rotation/lateral bending should also be controlled - TLSO provides this. The prescription should specify: (1) custom-molded or prefabricated TLSO, (2) 8-12 weeks duration, (3) wear whenever out of bed, (4) skin checks at pressure points, (5) review with repeat X-rays at 2, 6, and 12 weeks to monitor alignment. Physiotherapy for trunk strengthening can begin once pain allows, typically at 4-6 weeks.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
TLSO controls T9-L3 motion effectively - appropriate for L1 fracture
Jewett brace controls flexion only - not adequate for burst fractures
Three-point pressure principle applies to spinal orthoses
Intact PLC = stable fracture amenable to conservative management
COMMON TRAPS
✗Using Jewett brace for burst fracture (controls flexion only, not rotation)
✗Not specifying duration of bracing (8-12 weeks standard)
✗Failing to mention skin surveillance for pressure areas
✗Prescribing LSO instead of TLSO (L1 is at thoracolumbar junction)
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"If the fracture were at L4, how would your orthosis prescription differ?"
"What are the indications for surgical versus conservative management of burst fractures?"
"How does TLSO actually restrict motion - what are its biomechanical limitations?"
VIVA SCENARIOChallenging

Scenario 3: Paediatric Crouch Gait - Ground-Reaction AFO

EXAMINER

"A 10-year-old boy with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy (GMFCS Level II) presents with progressive crouch gait over the past year. Examination shows bilateral knee flexion of 25 degrees in stance, ankle dorsiflexion to 15 degrees with knee extended, hip extension to neutral, and hamstring tightness (popliteal angle 45 degrees). He currently wears hinged AFOs. How would you approach his orthotic management?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This child has spastic diplegic CP with **crouch gait** - excessive knee flexion throughout stance phase. Crouch gait is a common progression in spastic diplegia, particularly during growth spurts when muscles fail to keep pace with bone growth, leading to relative muscle shortening and increased flexed posture. The current hinged AFOs are no longer adequate because they do not address the knee flexion. The key examination findings to note are: **knee flexion 25 degrees in stance** (significant crouch), **ankle dorsiflexion 15 degrees** (not in fixed equinus - can dorsiflex), **hip extension to neutral** (adequate hip extension), and **hamstring tightness** (popliteal angle 45 degrees - moderate). Given these findings, I would prescribe **Ground-Reaction AFOs (GRAFOs)** or **Floor Reaction AFOs (FRAFOs)** bilaterally. The biomechanical principle is that by **blocking ankle dorsiflexion** and setting the ankle in slight dorsiflexion (5-10 degrees), the ground reaction force vector is moved **anterior to the knee axis**, creating an **external knee extension moment**. This compensates for weak quadriceps or overpowering hamstrings. Key prerequisites for GRAFO success that this patient has: (1) **adequate hip extension** - he can extend to neutral, allowing progression over the AFO; (2) **no fixed knee flexion contracture** - his knee can extend passively; (3) **ambulatory potential** - GMFCS Level II is community ambulator. I would prescribe: bilateral custom-molded GRAFOs with rigid anterior tibial shell, ankle set at 5-10 degrees dorsiflexion, full-contact foot plate, and fitting with appropriate footwear. However, orthotic management alone may be insufficient. Given the progression of crouch and hamstring tightness, I would also recommend: (1) gait analysis to quantify the problem and guide treatment; (2) consideration of botulinum toxin to hamstrings if spasticity is contributing; (3) physiotherapy for stretching program; and (4) possible surgical intervention (hamstring lengthening, distal femoral extension osteotomy) if orthotic and conservative measures fail.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
GRAFO works by moving GRF anterior to knee - creating extension moment
Prerequisites: adequate hip extension, no fixed knee contracture, ambulatory potential
Ankle set in 5-10 degrees dorsiflexion to optimize GRF position
Crouch gait often requires multimodal approach (AFO, botox, surgery)
COMMON TRAPS
✗Continuing with hinged AFOs despite progressive crouch (will not help)
✗Prescribing GRAFO with fixed knee flexion contracture (will not work)
✗Forgetting to check hip extension - must progress over AFO
✗Expecting orthosis alone to solve crouch gait (often needs additional treatment)
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What if he had fixed knee flexion contracture of 20 degrees - can you still use GRAFO?"
"What surgical options exist for crouch gait and when would you consider them?"
"How does gait laboratory analysis help in managing crouch gait?"

Australian Context

NDIS and Orthotic Provision

The National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is the primary funding source for orthoses in Australia for eligible participants with permanent and significant disability. NDIS covers the full cost of medically necessary orthoses including AFOs, KAFOs, and spinal orthoses when linked to functional goals in the participant's plan.

NDIS Orthotic Funding:

  • Participants require NDIS plan with Assistive Technology funding
  • Orthotist assessment and prescription included in funding
  • Custom devices covered when clinically indicated
  • Maintenance and replacement included over device lifespan
  • Evidence of functional benefit required for funding approval

For non-NDIS patients (age-related conditions, acquired injuries), orthoses may be accessed through state-based assistive technology programs, private health insurance, or out-of-pocket payment. Many public hospitals provide orthotic services for acute fracture management.

Australian Orthotic Standards

Australian orthotists are certified through the Australian Orthotic Prosthetic Association (AOPA) with minimum Bachelor-level qualification. Custom orthoses are manufactured to ISO 8549 and ISO 22523 standards, ensuring consistent nomenclature and safety requirements. TGA registration is required for medical devices, with most orthoses classified as Class I (low risk).

Clinical Practice Patterns

In Australian orthopaedic practice, orthotic prescription typically follows collaborative multidisciplinary assessment. Major paediatric orthopaedic centres (Royal Children's Hospital Melbourne, Sydney Children's Hospital, Lady Cilento Brisbane) have integrated orthotic services for cerebral palsy management. Spinal orthotic prescription for trauma is standardized in major trauma centres following TSANZ (Trauma Service Australia and New Zealand) guidelines.

PBS Considerations:

  • Orthoses are not PBS-listed (devices, not medications)
  • Funding primarily through NDIS, state programs, or private payment
  • Contrast with medications where PBS subsidises most costs

ORTHOTIC PRESCRIPTION PRINCIPLES

High-Yield Exam Summary

Nomenclature

  • •AFO = Ankle-Foot Orthosis
  • •KAFO = Knee-Ankle-Foot Orthosis
  • •TLSO = Thoracolumbosacral Orthosis
  • •Named by joints crossed (ISO 8549)

Functions (4 Cs)

  • •Control - limit unwanted motion
  • •Correct - apply corrective forces
  • •Compensate - replace muscle function
  • •Protect - allow healing

AFO Selection

  • •Solid AFO = spastic equinus
  • •Hinged AFO = foot drop, intact PF
  • •Ground-reaction = crouch gait
  • •FRAFO = floor reaction, extends knee

Spinal Levels

  • •TLSO controls T9-L3 effectively
  • •Above T9 needs CTLSO (sternal)
  • •Below L3 needs thigh extension
  • •Halo vest for C0-C7 (best cervical)

Biomechanics

  • •Three-point pressure = all correction
  • •Longer lever arm = greater control
  • •GRAFO moves GRF anterior to knee
  • •Force distribution prevents ulcers

Prescription Must Include

  • •Diagnosis and functional goal
  • •Joints to control
  • •Motion to allow/block
  • •Material and footwear requirements
Quick Stats
Reading Time85 min
Related Topics

Lyme Disease - Musculoskeletal Manifestations

Osteomalacia

Osteoporosis

Reactive Arthritis (Reiter Syndrome)