SUPPORT SURFACE CONFIGURED TO IMPROVE ALIGNMENT OF A FOOT, AND METHOD OF FORMING SAME

A support surface for improving alignment of a foot relative to subtalar neutral position can be at least a portion of an insole, a midsole, an outsole, or an upper of footwear. A sidewall can extend upwardly from a central portion of the support surface. A medial portion of the sidewall can support the medial side of the foot. A lateral portion of the sidewall can be configured to support the lateral side of the foot. A highest point of the lateral portion of the sidewall, as measured along a straight line extending perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis, can be greater than a highest point of the medial portion of the sidewall, as measured along a straight line extending perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis. The support surface can be configured to align the foot more closely to a subtalar neutral alignment and reduce range of motion about the longitudinal axis.

Skip to: Description  ·  Claims  · Patent History  ·  Patent History
Description
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

The present application claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 63/480,833, filed Jan. 20, 2023 and titled “SUPPORT SURFACE CONFIGURED TO IMPROVE ALIGNMENT OF A FOOT, AND METHOD OF FORMING SAME”, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.

FIELD

The presently disclosed technology relates generally to footwear, and optionally insoles. More particularly, in one embodiment, the presently disclosed technology relates to a support surface configured to improve alignment of a foot.

SUMMARY

The human musculoskeletal system is remarkably complex and adaptable. It is also vulnerable, and those vulnerabilities can lead to pain, discomfort and even injury. In the workplace, problems can express themselves as foot, knee and back pain that reduce productivity and increase the risk of more serious injury.

The evolutionary adaptations that allow humans to walk upright on two legs also have consequences. Human' curved spines and flexible ankles are not ideal load-bearing structures. Consequently, the postural alignment of the body and the orientation of load bearing joints have important effects on mechanical efficiency, balance, and fatigue.

In this sense “alignment” of the skeleton is a lot like the more familiar notion of “front end alignment” in an automobile. Properly aligned suspension components and balanced wheels allow the vehicle to function optimally-increasing control, safety and performance while reducing fuel consumption (“energy expenditure”) and wear (“fatigue”). Aligning the skeleton offers equivalent benefits for human performance.

There are various methods of adjusting or correcting lower extremity alignment. Orthopedic shoes and prescription orthotics may be employed in extreme cases that require medical intervention. Less severe cases are frequently “self-medicated” with “stability” shoes, generic shoe inserts (insoles) and arch supports that are widely available in stores. Unfortunately, these off-the-shelf solutions are often ineffective in preventing the discomfort and fatigue, and their sequelae, that accumulate over the course of a day's work.

Fatigue is not just the result of strenuous exercise. It also occurs in workers who are required to stand in place for long periods of time, especially on hard surfaces. Unrelenting pressure on the plantar surface of the foot constricts blood flow, producing the swelling of the foot and lower leg that many experience after extended periods of standing. The body's reflexes may try to alleviate the problem by making frequent micro-adjustments to posture, with the unfortunate consequence that the small muscles used to control posture become more fatigued as the day progresses, hence exacerbating the problem.

The conventional “arch support” is not an effective solution. The term “arch support” is itself a sales tool rather than a functional description. The arch of the foot is like the arch of a bridge. It is a self-supporting structure that bridges a gap between the heel and the toes. It is not intended to bear load in the “gap” region and instead transmits loads to the ground at its endpoints. In almost all cases the arch of the foot functions normally and does not need additional support. If it does, then it's an extreme case, like a bridge with a collapsed arch, and requires medical or surgical intervention. Also, off the shelf arch supports are made of foam and other lightweight materials, sometimes with a stiffer plastic substructure. The peak load produced during a walking step is typically between 140% and 180% of bodyweight-about 150 lb. for a small person and 450 lb. or more for a large one. The flimsy construction of most arch supports is not even capable of “supporting” loads of this magnitude. Foam arch supports may improve comfort and enhance fit, but they do not “support”.

Similarly, the effectiveness of “support” and “pronation control” shoes is now questioned, and numerous studies have found them to be an ineffective way of aligning and controlling the foot. One likely reason is that these interventions (wedges, medial posts, etc.) have been in the midsole of a shoe and not next to the foot. Despite this, as both clinicians and orthotists are aware, in-shoe interventions can be effective, at least when individually customized.

The “pronation paradigm” has been a dominant theme in podiatry, orthotic treatment and athletic footwear design for many years. The paradigm is based on the notion that excessive pronation of the foot is a significant factor in a number common foot and lower leg injuries.

Commonly, pronation is depicted as shown blow, in a posterior or “rearfoot” view. From this perspective, “pronation” is a rolling inward of foot ankle and “supination” is a rolling motion in the opposite direction. Pronation-supination is of course more complicated than the below 2D rearfoot view suggests. Referring to FIG. 43, it is a motion about the talo-calcaneal (“subtalar”) joint that combines “rolling” of the heel with external rotation (“turning out”) of the foot and dorsiflexion (“toes up” flexion).

Also, since the talus also connects to the midfoot, most importantly to the navicular bone, pronation also involves motion of the midfoot and arch. In fact, referring to FIG. 44, midfoot pronation and supination are commonly more significant than the heel motion component.

The complex 3D motion occurs because the ankle is not a simple hinge joint, but a combination of joints with different orientations. The subtalar joint axis is tilted, relative to the body's axes, in all three planes. Referring to FIG. 45, the “oblique hinge” of the subtalar joint has some important effects:

    • 1) The pronation/supination axis is not aligned with any of the major foot and leg axes.
    • 2) Pronation is accompanied by a medial shift of the ankle and midfoot (“navicular shift”);
    • 3) In a fixed coordinate system, pronation of the foot requires compensatory internal rotation of the tibia.

“Excessive” pronation has been associated with overuse injuries, particularly in runners. These include “runner's knee”, Achilles tendinitis, plantar fasciitis and other common injuries. Briefly, the pronation paradigm purports the following:

    • 1) Flat, flexible feet pronate excessively, resulting in abnormal loading of the foot and transmission of twisting forces to the knee. Such feet require correction in the form of arch support, medial posting, etc. to resist pronation.
    • 2) High arched feet are rigid and do not pronate enough. Pronation and flexion of the arch are themselves internal cushioning mechanisms that absorb loads on the foot. Such feet are inherently stable but require cushioning to compensate for the lack of foot flexibility.
    • 3) Ideally, the foot should be “neutrally” aligned, i.e., neither pronated nor supinated.

It is important to note that views on the value of the pronation paradigm vary and that some elements of it have not been supported by controlled laboratory studies. Even so, the concepts of “pronation” and “pronation control” remain important in the treatment of athletic injuries, the prescription of orthotics and the design of running shoes.

Further relevant discussion can be found in Gait Posture, 2018 February; 60:175-180. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.12.001, as well as in U.S. Pat. No. 9,060,565 B2, each of which are incorporated by reference herein.

Further relevant discussion can also be found in Comparative Kinesiology of the Human body, by Salih Angin and Ibrahim Engin Simsek, Academic Press, Copyright 2023, which is incorporated by reference herein.

Additional relevant discussion can be found in the following locations:

    • 1. Martin RL, Davenport TE, Reischl SF, McPoil TG, Matheson JW, Wukich DK, McDonough CM; American Physical Therapy Association. Heel pain-plantar fasciitis: revision 2014. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Nov;44(11):A1-33. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2014.0303. PMID: 25361863.
    • 2. Cambron JA, Dexheimer JM, Duarte M, Freels S. Shoe Orthotics for the Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Sep;98(9):1752-1762. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.03.028. Epub 2017 Apr 30. PMID: 28465224.
    • 3. Castro-Méndez A, Munuera PV, Albornoz-Cabello M. The short-term effect of custom-made foot orthoses in subjects with excessive foot pronation and lower back pain: a randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2013 Oct;37(5):384-90. doi: 10.1177/0309364612471370. Epub 2013 Jan 17. PMID: 23327838.
    • 4. Menz HB, Dufour AB, Riskowski JL, Hillstrom HJ, Hannan MT. Foot posture, foot function and low back pain: the Framingham Foot Study. Rheumatology. 2013 Dec;52(12):2275-82. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/ket298. Epub 2013 Sep 17. PMID: 24049103; PMCID: PMC 3828513.
    • 5. Mulford D, Taggart HM, Nivens A, Payrie C. Arch support use for improving balance and reducing pain in older adults. Appl Nurs Res. 2008 Aug;21(3):153-8. doi: 10.1016/j.apnr.2006.08.006. PMID: 18684409.
    • 6. Mills K, Blanch P, Dev P, Martin M, Vicenzino B. A randomised control trial of short term efficacy of in-shoe foot orthoses compared with a wait and see policy for anterior knee pain and the role of foot mobility. Br J Sports Med. 2012 Mar;46(4):247-52. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2011-090204. Epub 2011 Sep 18. PMID: 21930514.
    • 7. Waddington GS. Foot exercise and orthotics more effective than knee exercise in PFJ pain. J Sci Med Sport. 2018 Jan;21(1):1. doi: 10.1016/j.jsams.2017.11.014. PMID: 29224897.
    • 8. Vicenzino B, Collins N, Cleland J, et al. A clinical prediction rule for identifying patients with patellofemoral pain who are likely to benefit from foot orthoses: a preliminary determination. British Journal of Sports Medicine. 2010;44:862-866.
    • 9. Pires Neves, M., Sena da Conceição, C., Lucareli, P. R., Barbosa, R. S., Vieira, J. P., Brasileiro, A. J., da Silva, G. F., & Gomes-Neto, M. (2022). Effects of foot orthoses on pain and the prevention of lower limb injuries in runners: Systematic Review and meta-analysis. Journal of Sport Rehabilitation, 31(8), 1067-1074.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1123/jsr.2021-0302
    • 10. Welte, L., Kelly, L. A., Lichtwark, G. A., & Rainbow, M. J. (2018). Influence of the windlass mechanism on arch-spring mechanics during dynamic foot arch deformation. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 15(145), 20180270.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2018.0270
    • 11. Hesarikia, H., Nazemian, S. S., Rasouli, H. R., & Kazemi, H. M. (2014). Effect of foot orthoses on ankle and foot injuries in military service recruits: A randomized controlled trial. Biosciences Biotechnology Research Asia, 11(3), 1141-1148.
    •  https://doi.org/10.13005/bbra/1499
    • 12. Bonanno, D. R., Landorf, K. B., Munteanu, S. E., Murley, G. S., & Menz, H. B. (2016). Effectiveness of foot orthoses and shock-absorbing insoles for the prevention of injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 51(2), 86-96.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-096671
    • 13. Nigg, Bennom, Stergiou, Pro, Cole, Gerald, Stefanyshyn, Darren, Mundermann, Anne, & Humble, Neil (2003). Effect of shoe inserts on Kinematics, center of pressure, and leg joint moments during running. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 35(2), 314-319.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000048828.02268.79
    • 14. Andriacchi, T. P., Favre, J., Erhart-Hledik, J. C., & Chu, C. R. (2014). A systems view of risk factors for knee osteoarthritis reveals insights into the pathogenesis of the disease. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 43(2), 376-387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-014-1117-2
    • 15. Kenawey, M., Liodakis, E., Krettek, C., Ostermeier, S., Horn, T., & Hankemeier, S. (2011). Effect of the lower limb rotational alignment on tibiofemoral contact pressure. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 19(11), 1851-1859.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1482-4
    • 16. Mills, K., Hunt, M. A., Leigh, R., & Ferber, R. (2013). A systematic review and meta-analysis of lower limb neuromuscular alterations associated with knee osteoarthritis during level walking. Clinical Biomechanics, 28(7), 713-724.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.07.008
    • 17. Harrison, K., Feeney, D., Pryhoda, M. K., Dicharry, J., Nelson, N. M., Shelburne, K. B., & Davidson, B. S. (2021). Alternative upper configurations during agility-based movements: Part 2, joint-level biomechanics. Footwear Science, 13(2), 167-180.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1080/19424280.2021.1899296
    • 18. AKALTUN, M. S., & KOçYİĞİT, B. F. (2021). Assessment of foot posture and related factors in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Archives of Rheumatology, 36(2), 267-273.
    •  https://doi.org/10.46497/archrheumatol.2021.8354
    • 19. Kubo, T., Uritani, D., Ogaya, S., Kita, S., Fukumoto, T., Fujii, T., Inagaki, Y., Tanaka, Y., & Imagita, H. (2022). Association between foot posture and tibiofemoral contact forces during barefoot walking in patients with knee osteoarthritis.
    •  https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1213732/v1
    • 20. Mills, K., Hunt, M. A., & Ferber, R. (2013). Biomechanical deviations during level walking associated with knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Arthritis Care & Research. https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.22015
    • 21. Ornetti, P., Maillefert, J.-F., Laroche, D., Morisset, C., Dougados, M., & Gossec, L. (2010). Gait analysis as a quantifiable outcome measure in hip or knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review. Joint Bone Spine, 77(5), 421-425.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbspin.2009.12.009
    • 22. Astephen, J. L., Deluzio, K. J., Caldwell, G. E., Dunbar, M. J., & Hubley-Kozey, C. L. (2008). Gait and neuromuscular pattern changes are associated with differences in knee osteoarthritis severity levels. Journal of Biomechanics, 41(4), 868-876.
    •  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.10.016
    • 23. Collins, N., Bisset, L., McPoil, T., & Vicenzino, B. (2007). Foot orthoses in lower limb overuse conditions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Foot & Ankle International, 28(3), 396-412. https://doi.org/10.3113/fai.2007.0396
    • 24. Kao, M.-J., Chen, T.-H., Chou, L.-W., Tsai, M.-W., & Lo, M.-J. (2014). Effectiveness of a heel cup with an arch support insole on the standing balance of the elderly. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 351
    • 25. Collins N, Bisset L, McPoil T, Vicenzino B. Foot orthoses in lower limb overuse conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Foot Ankle Int. 2007 Mar;28(3):396-412. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2007.0396. PMID: 17371668, which references evidence from the meta-analysis to support the use of insoles in the prevention of lower-limb overuse conditions. The analysis also shows that there is evidence from pooled data that there is no difference between the use of custom and prefabricated foot orthoses, inferring either can be used in the prevention and treatment of lower-limb overuse injuries.
    • 26. Parashar, U, Khalid, S, Kumar, Y. (2020) The influence of foot orthotic interventions on workplace ergonomics. International Journal of Health Sciences and Research. 10(7):132-138, which explains that ergonomically designed footwear and the appropriate orthotic interventions increase comfort and prevent injuries by optimally aligning the feet and improving the functional balance and muscular functions of the lower limb, for prevention and protection against workplace injuries.
    • 27. Bonanno DR, Murley GS, Munteanu SE, Landorf KB, Menz HB. Effectiveness of foot orthoses for the prevention of lower limb overuse injuries in naval recruits: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Sports Med. 2018 Mar;52(5):298-302. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098273. Epub 2017 Oct 22. PMID: 29056595, which shows that insoles may be beneficial for reducing the incidence of lower limb injury in naval recruits.
    • 28. Cambron, J. A., Dexheimer, J. M., Duarte, M., & Freels, S. (2017). Shoe orthotics for the treatment of chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 98(9), 1752-1762, where shoe orthotics were shown to significantly improve back pain and dysfunction in adult subjects compared with no treatment.
    • 29. Jefferson, J. R. (2013). The effect of cushioning insoles on back and lower extremity pain in an industrial setting. Workplace health & safety, 61(10), 451-457, which explains that cushioning insoles reduce lower extremity and low back pain in industrial workers, and provide an additive benefit for employees already using anti-fatigue mats.
    • 30. King, PM (2002) A comparison of the effects of floor mats and shoe in-soles on standing fatigue. Applied Ergonomics 33:477-484, which explains that insoles are as effective as floor mats at reducing fatigue. However, insoles are dynamic and move with the individual, whereas mats are static and only available in certain areas.
    • 31. Carley, Patrick & Lachowski, Susan & Mullin, Elizabeth. (2017). Floor Mats and Insoles: Workplace Considerations for Safe Dynamic Standing. Journal of Bones and Muscle Study. Volume 2017. 01, which explains that insoles provide more subjective cushioning and improve balance reactions through efficient recruitment of trunk and leg muscles.

It would be desirable to provide footwear, or at least a support surface within footwear, that overcomes the above and other drawbacks of the prior art.

The presently disclosed technology provides a more neutral alignment of the foot and/or enhanced pronation control. By aligning the lower extremity so the body is better able to balance loads, and by reducing pressure under the foot, the present technology combats fatigue at its source.

In one embodiment, the presently disclosed technology addresses the problems of alignment and control at the source. Apparent height loss of the arch is the result of inward rotation (pronation) of the ankle at the subtalar joint. In one optional embodiment, the presently disclosed technology works primarily by aligning the ankle joint and heel in a more neutral posture which naturally rotates (supinates) and elevates the arch as a secondary effect. The presently disclosed technology does not need to be customized for each individual; the technology naturally adjust to the wearer's needs and encourage an optimal alignment while helping to avoid extremes of malalignment.

Unlike most orthotics and insoles with rigid components, the presently disclosed technology enhances comfort, too. Comfort is provided by high quality, durable foam materials and a unique geometry that cradles the foot and distributes loads more evenly.

The presently disclosed technology combines features that align and support the foot while adding comfort.

The presently disclosed technology is efficient in aligning the foot and ankle, reducing pressure on the sole of the foot, and enhancing comfort. The presently disclosed technology adapts to individual needs, providing a solution with less intervention required.

In addition to the human cost, workplace discomfort and fatigue contribute to lost productivity, lost hours, higher health care costs and increased risk of errors and accidents. The presently disclosed technology provides the foundation for a comprehensive solution by offering a cost effective and flexible way of meeting some important biomechanical needs while enhancing employees' comfort and satisfaction.

In one embodiment, the presently disclosed technology is directed generally to improving the feel, comfort, and/or performance of insoles and/or shoes;

FIGS. 46A-46C are diagrammatic representations of the bones of the ankle and hindfoot in the coronal plane. The axis of the hindfoot is represented by dotted lines indicating the tibial axis and the lateral calcaneal border. FIG. 46A shows normal hindfoot alignment. FIG. 46B shows hindfoot varus with combined medial angulation of the talus, navicula, and calcaneus relative to the tibial axis. FIG. 46C shows hindfoot valgus with combined lateral angulation of the talus, navicula, and calcaneus relative to the tibial axis.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE SEVERAL VIEWS OF THE DRAWINGS

The foregoing summary, as well as the following detailed description of the presently disclosed technology, will be better understood when read in conjunction with the appended drawings. For the purpose of illustrating the presently disclosed technology, there are shown in the drawings various illustrative embodiments. It should be understood, however, that the presently disclosed technology is not limited to the precise arrangements and instrumentalities shown. In the drawings:

FIG. 1 is a lateral side elevation view of footwear according to one embodiment of the presently disclosed technology, wherein at least a portion of the footwear is shown as transparent for clarity only;

FIG. 2 is a medial side elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 3 is a front elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 4 is a rear elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 5 is a lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 6 is a medial side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 7 is a partially exploded lateral side elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 8 is a partially exploded medial side elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 9 is a partially exploded front elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 10 is a partially exploded rear elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 11 is a partially exploded lateral perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 12 is a partially exploded medial perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 1;

FIG. 13 is a lateral side elevation view of footwear according to another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology, wherein at least a portion of the footwear is shown as transparent for clarity only;

FIG. 14 is a medial side elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 13;

FIG. 15 is a lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 13;

FIG. 16 is a medial side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 13;

FIG. 17 is another lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 13;

FIG. 18 is yet another lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 13, wherein one or more portions thereof are omitted for clarity only;

FIG. 19 is a lateral side elevation view of footwear according to yet another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology, wherein at least a portion of the footwear is shown as transparent for clarity only;

FIG. 20 is a medial side elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 19;

FIG. 21 is a lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 19;

FIG. 22 is a medial side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 19;

FIG. 23 is a front elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 19;

FIG. 24 is a rear elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 19;

FIG. 25 is a lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 19, wherein one or more portions thereof are omitted for clarity only;

FIG. 26 is a lateral side elevation view of footwear according to still another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology, wherein at least a portion of the footwear is shown as transparent for clarity only;

FIG. 27 is a medial side elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 26;

FIG. 28 is a lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 26;

FIG. 29 is a medial side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 26;

FIG. 30 is a front elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 26;

FIG. 31 is a lateral side elevation view of footwear according to another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology, wherein at least a portion of the footwear is shown as transparent for clarity only;

FIG. 32 is a medial side elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 31;

FIG. 33 is a lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 31;

FIG. 34 is a medial side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 31;

FIG. 35 is a front elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 31;

FIG. 36 is a rear elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 31;

FIG. 37 is a lateral side elevation view of footwear according to still another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology, wherein at least a portion of the footwear is shown as transparent for clarity only;

FIG. 38 is a medial side elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 37;

FIG. 39 is a lateral side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 37;

FIG. 40 is a medial side perspective view of the footwear of FIG. 37;

FIG. 41 is a front elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 37;

FIG. 42 is a rear elevation view of the footwear of FIG. 37;

FIG. 43 show various positions of a right foot;

FIG. 44 show portions of a foot;

FIG. 45 show various positions of a right foot;

FIG. 46A shows a neutral/normal hindfoot alignment of a foot;

FIG. 46B shows overpronation of a foot (e.g., flat foot);

FIG. 46C shows over supination of a foot (e.g., flat foot); and

FIG. 47 shows reference zones for a skeletal foot.

 DETAILED DESCRIPTION

While systems, devices and methods are described herein by way of examples and embodiments, those skilled in the art recognize that the systems, devices and methods of the presently disclosed technology are not limited to the embodiments or drawings described.

Rather, the presently disclosed technology covers all modifications, equivalents and alternatives falling within the spirit and scope of the appended claims. Any headings used herein are for organizational purposes only and are not meant to limit the scope of the description or the claims.

Certain terminology is used in the following description for convenience only and is not limiting. The words “bottom,” “top,” “left,” “right,” “lower” and “upper” designate directions in the drawings to which reference is made. Unless specifically set forth herein, the terms “a,” “an” and “the” are not limited to one element but instead should be read as meaning “at least one.” As used herein, the word “may” is used in a permissive sense (i.e., meaning having the potential to) rather than the mandatory sense (i.e., meaning must). The terminology includes the words noted above, derivatives thereof and words of similar import.

Features of any one embodiment disclosed herein can be omitted or incorporated into another embodiment.

Referring to the drawings in detail, wherein like numerals indicate like elements throughout, FIGS. 1-12 show footwear according to one embodiment of the presently disclosed technology. FIGS. 1-12 show footwear designed for a right foot, and a corresponding or mirror-image footwear can be designed for the left foot.

In one embodiment, the footwear is a shoe, such as a running shoe, that include an insole, a midsole, and outsole, and an upper. In one optional embodiment, the midsole can be attached or fixed to the outsole (e.g., such as by adhesive or a mechanical connection) and the insole can be separable from the midsole, the outsole, and the upper. Although the footwear is shown in the present embodiment as a shoe, such as a running shoe, other types of footwear are possible as explained herein.

In one embodiment, the presently disclosed technology can include a support surface for the improvement of the alignment of a foot relative to subtalar neutral position. In another or the same embodiment, the support surface can be configured to improve alignment of the foot. Optionally, the support surface is configured to align the foot more closely to a sub-talar neutral alignment and reduce range of motion about the longitudinal axis of the foot. Optionally, the support surface is configured to reduce movement along a roll axis of the foot, and/or can permit, prevent, or delay movement along a pitch and/or yawn axis of the foot.

Proper or improved alignment is important because it can have a direct, positive impact on at least the lower kinetic chain (e.g., the lower body). For example, the support surface can be configured to prevent excessive or hyper supination and/or pronation, and/or prevent unsafe ranges of motion.

Optionally, the support surface can be at least a portion of the insole, the midsole, the outsole, or an upper of the footwear.

The foot can include a medial side, a lateral side, a sustentaculum tali, a lateral calcaneus, a medial calcaneus, a heel at a hindfoot, a midfoot, and a forefoot (e.g., see FIGS. 44 and 47).

The support surface can have at least a hindfoot section and a midfoot section configured to support the hindfoot and the midfoot of the foot, respectively. The support surface can be configured to receive at least a portion of the hindfoot and the midfoot of the foot. Optionally, the support surface can also have a forefoot section configured to support the forefoot of the foot. The support surface can have a first end proximate the heel of the foot and an opposing second end proximate the forefoot of the foot.

A longitudinal axis of the support surface can extend from the first end to the opposing second end and can extend through a lateral midpoint of the support surface.

A sidewall can extend upwardly from a central portion of the support surface. A medial portion of the sidewall can be configured to support the medial side of the foot. A lateral portion of the sidewall can be configured to support the lateral side of the foot.

In one optional embodiment, a highest point of the lateral portion of the sidewall, as measured along a straight line extending perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis, is greater than a highest point of the medial portion of the sidewall, as measured along a straight line extending perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis. This can be clearly seen in at least FIGS. 8-10,

The higher lateral portion of the sidewall can create increased surface area contact with the foot, which allows for more control and/or alignment of the foot.

Optionally, the insole, the midsole, the outsole, and the upper can be formed of different materials, or two or more of these components can be formed of the same or similar material. For example, foam, polymeric material(s) (e.g., nylon and/or thermoplastic urethane) and/or composite materials can be employed.

In one embodiment, the lateral portion of the sidewall provides a counterforce to the medial side helping to control the proper range of motion and putting the ST into an optimal neutral position

Optionally, the support surface can be part of the insole, which can be made of a separate material (or materials) from the midsole, the outsole, and/or the upper, and can be selectively removable from and insertable into the footwear and/or the upper.

One embodiment of the presently disclosed technology has been found to reduce total pronation (relative to neutral) between the tibia and the heel from 9.0 degrees to 3.2 degrees (65%) on average, and between the tibia and the arch from 5.8 degrees to 4.0 degrees (31%).

In another embodiment, the presently disclosed technology has been shown to reduce the alignment deviation from neutral from 9.2 degrees to 5.0 degrees (45%) (heel) and from 5.8 degrees to 2.6 degrees (56%) (arch).

Differences among the presently disclosed technology and other conditions were statistically significant (p<0.005).

The number of subjects demonstrating an improvement in alignment in insoles of the presently disclosed technology versus other insoles ranged from a minimum of 25/31(80%) to 31/31 (100%) depending on the specific comparison made.

FIGS. 13-18 show another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology. Description of certain similarities between the embodiment of FIGS. 1-12 and the embodiment of FIGS. 13-18 may be omitted herein for convenience and brevity only.

In the present embodiment, the insole and the midsole can be a combined, unitary, and/or monolithic structure. The combined and unitary insole and midsole can be attached to the outsole and/or the upper, and the combined and unitary insole and midsole can be formed of a different material, or have a different durometer, than the outsole and/or the upper.

In the present embodiment, the support surface described with respect to the embodiment of FIGS. 1-12 can be part or form parts of the combined insole/midsole.

FIGS. 19-25 show another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology. Description of certain similarities between the prior embodiments and the embodiment of FIGS. 19-25 may be omitted herein for convenience and brevity only.

In the present embodiment, the insole, the midsole, and the outsole can be a combined, unitary, and/or monolithic structure, which can be formed of a single material. One benefit of this design can be to ensure the correct configuration of the support surface to improve alignment for the wearer. The combined and unitary insole, midsole, outsole can be attached to the upper, and the combined and unitary insole, midsole, outsole can be formed of a different material than the upper.

In the present embodiment, the support surface described with respect to the embodiment of FIGS. 1-12 can be part or form parts of the combined insole/midsole/outsole.

FIGS. 26-30 show another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology. Description of certain similarities between the prior embodiments and the embodiment of FIGS. 26-30 may be omitted herein for convenience and brevity only.

The footwear shown in FIGS. 26-30 can be a boot and/or a high-top shoe, for example.

The footwear of the present embodiment can include separate insole, midsole, and outsole components. Alternatively, the footwear of the present embodiment can include a combined insole/midsole as shown and explained in the embodiment of FIGS. 13-18. Alternatively, the footwear of the present embodiment can include a combined insole/midsole/outsole as shown in the embodiment of FIGS. 19-25.

FIGS. 31-36 show another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology. Description of certain similarities between the prior embodiments and the embodiment of FIGS. 31-36 may be omitted herein for convenience and brevity only.

The footwear shown in FIGS. 31-36 can be a dress and/or casual shoe, for example.

The footwear of the present embodiment can include separate insole, midsole, and outsole components. Alternatively, the footwear of the present embodiment can include a combined insole/midsole as shown and explained in the embodiment of FIGS. 13-18. Alternatively, the footwear of the present embodiment can include a combined insole/midsole/outsole as shown in the embodiment of FIGS. 19-25.

FIGS. 37-42 show another embodiment of the presently disclosed technology. Description of certain similarities between the prior embodiments and the embodiment of FIGS. 37-42 may be omitted herein for convenience and brevity only.

The footwear shown in FIGS. 37-42 can be a slide, a sandal, and/or an open toe shoe, for example.

The footwear of the present embodiment can include separate insole, midsole, and outsole components. Alternatively, the footwear of the present embodiment can include a combined insole/midsole as shown and explained in the embodiment of FIGS. 13-18. Alternatively, the footwear of the present embodiment can include a combined insole/midsole/outsole as shown in the embodiment of FIGS. 19-25.

The presently disclosed technology also includes a method of forming (such as, but not limited to, molding) a support surface for footwear. The method can include forming (e.g., molding) the lateral sidewall of the support surface to extend higher than the medial sidewall of the support surface.

It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that changes could be made to the embodiments described above without departing from the broad inventive concept thereof. It is understood, therefore, that the presently disclosed technology is not limited to the particular embodiments disclosed, but it is intended to cover modifications within the spirit and scope of the presently disclosed technology as defined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A support surface for improving alignment of a foot relative to subtalar neutral position, the foot having a medial side, a lateral side, a sustentaculum tali, a lateral calcaneus, a heel at a hindfoot, a midfoot, and a forefoot, the support surface being at least a portion of an insole, a midsole, an outsole, or an upper of footwear, the support surface comprising:

a support surface having at least a hindfoot section and a midfoot section configured to support and control the hindfoot and the midfoot of the foot, respectively, the support surface having a first end proximate the heel of the foot and an opposing second end proximate the forefoot of the foot, a longitudinal axis of the support surface extending from the first end to the opposing second end and extending through a lateral midpoint of the support surface, the support surface being configured to receive at least a portion of the hindfoot and the midfoot of the foot; and
a sidewall extending upwardly from a central portion of the support surface, a medial portion of the sidewall being configured to support the medial side of the foot, a lateral portion of the sidewall being configured to support the lateral side of the foot,
wherein a highest point of the lateral portion of the sidewall, as measured along a straight line extending perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis, is greater than a highest point of the medial portion of the sidewall, as measured along the straight line extending perpendicularly to the longitudinal axis, and
wherein the support surface is configured to align and control the hindfoot into a sub-talar neutral alignment position and reduce range of motion about the longitudinal axis of the foot.

2. The support surface of claim 1, wherein the higher lateral portion of the sidewall creates increased surface area contact with the foot, which allows for more control or alignment of the foot.

3. The support surface of claim 1, wherein the foot has a plurality of distal phalanges, and wherein the support surface is sized to extend from the heel of the foot to the plurality of distal phalanges of the foot and be positioned beneath both the heel and the plurality of distal phalanges.

4. The support surface of claim 1, wherein a bottom of the support surface includes a circular, oval, or contoured pad.

5. The support surface of claim 4, wherein the pad extends downwardly from a plate, the plate being formed of a material with a greater stiffness or hardness than a remainder of the support surface.

6. (canceled)

7. The support surface of claim 1, wherein the support surface and the sidewall combine to form a continuous surface aside from any air perforations in the forefoot section of the support surface.

8. The support surface of claim 1, wherein an undulation of a top surface of the lateral portion of the sidewall being different than an undulation of a top surface of the medial portion of the sidewall.

9. The support surface of claim 1, wherein the medial portion of the sidewall is configured to provide an upward and outward force on the sustentaculum tali.

10. The support surface of claim 9, wherein the medial portion of the sidewall is adapted to not extend past an ankle bone when the foot is placed on the support surface and the foot is not rotated.

11. The support surface of claim 1, wherein the support surface is part of the insole, and wherein the insole is removably insertable into a shoe.

12. (canceled)

13. The support of claim 12, wherein the insole is configured to rest on top of the midsole.

14. The support surface of claim 1, wherein the support surface is part of the midsole, and wherein an upper is fastened to a perimeter of the midsole.

15. (canceled)

16. The support surface of claim 1, wherein the support surface is part of the outsole.

17. The support surface of claim 16, wherein an upper is fastened to a perimeter of the outsole.

18. The support surface of claim 16, where the sidewall is configured to extend continuously above the central portion of the support surface around at least a back of the heel.

19. The support surface of claim 1, wherein the footwear is in the form of a running shoe, a walking shoe, a dress shoe, a casual shoe, a boot, a slide, an open toe shoe, or a sandal.

20. The support surface of claim 1, wherein a top surface of the medial portion of the sidewall undulates and extends continuously from the first end of the support surface toward the second end of the surface.

21. The support surface of claim 20, wherein a top surface of the lateral portion of the sidewall undulates from the first end of the support surface toward the second end of the support surface.

22. The support surface of claim 1, wherein an undulation of a top surface of the lateral portion of the sidewall having a constant slope in the hindfoot section.

23. The support surface of claim 1, wherein at least a portion of an undulation of a top surface of the medial portion of the sidewall having a slope of zero.

Patent History
Publication number: 20260223980
Type: Application
Filed: Jan 22, 2024
Publication Date: Aug 6, 2026
Inventors: Christopher BUCK (Tualatin, OR), Calvin M. BUCK, IV (Tualatin, OR)
Application Number: 19/149,363
Classifications
International Classification: A43B 7/24 (20060101); A43B 3/12 (20060101); A43B 5/06 (20220101); A43B 13/16 (20060101); A43B 17/00 (20060101);