Re: Re: shoes vs. Markell shoes

[Guest guest]

That's good advice, there are many kids in Markell shoes who have never

had a problem, my son included. Unless your baby has atypical clubfoot

(or they are still not corrected) you should be OK with the Markell

shoes. And you're experienced now, so you'll be able to see the warning

signs quickly if they aren't working - before blisters form.

Regarding full correction of feet, they should look really

'over-corrected' (the external rotation should be 70 degrees) and the

heel able to flex (the shoes are adjusted to 15 deg dorsiflexion to keep

the Achilles tendon stetched).

If this is what your childs feet look like and the Markell shoes are

correctly fitted, you should be OK after a few days of grumpy baby

adjusting to having to move both feet together!

and

24 Jan 2003, bilateral cf

In Markell shoes since May 2003

www.clubfoot.co.za

Re: shoes vs. Markell shoes

I have used both shoes and this is what I came up with:

Pros

Holds the foot with 3 straps

Work for atypical clubfeet

Has holes in the back to see that heal is down

Made with very soft leather

Cons

Insurance won't pay

Some cracking in the black plastic on the front and back

Takes several weeks to get

Markell Pro's

Insurance will pay

Holds correction for most clubfeet

[Guest guest]

.

Just an FYI. Markells now makes a pair with holes in the heels.

Shook

Retail Operations Manager/Baking Instructor

Vie de France Yamazaki, Inc.

2070 Chain Bridge Rd. Suite 500

Vienna, VA 22182

x374

x374

fax

[Guest guest]

Does anyone have an opinion on what shoes would be best for a preemie? Yes,

he'll be about 2 1/2 months when we start but his feet are not the size of a

full term baby. Should I start out in the Markel or just go straight to the

's. For some reason I thought I read on this website once 's

are better for preemies?

Why won't insurance pay for shoes?

& Aidan blcf 8/5/2004

sarah.beaver@...> wrote:

I have used both shoes and this is what I came up with:

Pros

Holds the foot with 3 straps

Work for atypical clubfeet

Has holes in the back to see that heal is down

Made with very soft leather

Cons

Insurance won't pay

Some cracking in the black plastic on the front and back

Takes several weeks to get

Markell Pro's

Insurance will pay

Holds correction for most clubfeet

Cons

Can allow slipping and blisters

No holes to see that heals are down

My advice is to try the Markell shoes again. You will be able to

tell in the first couple days if you are going to have a problem. I

would take them off every couple hours for the first few days to

check for red spots/blisters. If you do have a problem call

and explain your problem and try and get the other shoes

asap. Worst-case scenario you need to put him back in cast for a

couple weeks until the shoes arrive. JMO.

Tori bilateral atypical cf shoes 18 hrs

non cf

[Guest guest]

I have always heard that s are better for premies because they hold a

tiny foot better since there are more straps. They might come in smaller

sizes than markell's but I am not sure about that.

Insurance won't pay because the s are still patent pending and

therefore they don't have an insurance code. I am pretty sure that is the main

reason anyways.

Talk to your doctor. He should know if Markells work well for premies. It

seems that I have heard people say that they wait to start treatment on premies

because there is no DBB with shoes small enough to fit them if they finish

casting when the feet are small.

I wouldn't swear to anything I said because I am just going off of what I

think I have read on this site before. I don't have any personal experience

with

this issue, but I am sure you will get lots of input from people who have the

experience.

HTH

Freeman