# Can Foot Orthoses Prevent Falls? A Proposal for a New Evaluation Protocol
## 3 Results  
### Overall Population Analysis  
Before starting with the analysis between the different subgroups chosen, the analyses were conducted on overall patient characteristics. The parameters--sway area, sway pathAP, and sway pathML--were analyzed, distinguishing between exercises performed with eyes open, eyes closed, and in the tandem position.  
The boxplot in Figure 2 below shows the comparison of sway areas (mm\({}^{2}\)/s) across three time points (t0, t1, and t2) under the three different tasks. The sway area under the first condition remains relatively low across all three time points; median values are slightly increased in t1 with respect to t0 and t2. The InterQuartile Ranges (IQRs) are small, indicating consistent results across the group. Under the eyes-closed condition, a similar trend is seen, with slightly higher sway areas compared to the previous one. The tandem condition exhibits the largest sway areas and values with significant differences with respect to EO and EC natural standing conditions, highlighting its higher difficulty (t0: EO vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001, EC vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001; t1: EO vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001, EC vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001; and t2: EO vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001, EC vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c} \hline \hline
**Plantar Type** & \\ \hline Biomechanical insole with polypropylene & 6 \\ Accommodative insole with resin and retrocapital bar/olive & 11 \\ Biomechanical insole with polypropylene and forefoot/rearfoot posting & 11 \\ Accommodative insole without retro capital bar/olive & 7 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: Patients’ classification in function of the four different foot orthotics applied.  
In Figure 3, the sway pathAP boxplot across three time points (t0, t1, and t2) under three task conditions is reported. Under the eyes-open condition, the median sway pathAP values are stable across t0, t1, and t2, with no significant differences. The IQR remains relatively narrow, showing small variability in performance for this task condition. Under the eyes-closed condition, there is a slight increase with respect to the eyes-open condition, with significant differences at t0 (_p_ < 0.05) and t2 (_p_ < 0.05). The IQR widens slightly at t1 and t2, indicating greater variability in performance as the task became more challenging without the visual input. Under the tandem condition, there are not any variations with respect to the previous condition. The task performed under tandem standing condition possesses a higher value in terms of sway pathAP with respect to the eyes open natural standing condition, with significant differences at t0 (_p_ < 0.01) and t2 (_p_ < 0.01).  
Finally, in Figure 4 is presented the sway pathML in mm/s across the three time points under the three task conditions. Under the eyes-open condition, the median sway pathML remains consistent across t0, t1, and t2, suggesting stable performance over time. The same situation can be seen in the eyes-closed condition, with no significant differences with respect to the eyes-open condition. The tandem task consistently shows the highest median sway pathML values among all conditions, indicating the greatest challenge for the patients (t0: EO vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001, EC vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001; t1: EO vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001, EC vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001; and t2: EO vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001, EC vs. T, \(p\) < 0.0001).