EC Clinical and Medical Case Reports

Through the tactile Sens, podiatry and treatment with insoles are approved to evaluate the participation of the podal modality in the treatment of neuro-developmental disorders like sensory processing disorders and/or specific learning disabilities (e.g. dyslexia, dysgraphia). The quantitative assessments of the exteroceptive plantar sole participation were conducted with the clinical testing of the Proprioceptive Dysfunction Syndrome: the most contemporary of the multisensory integration/processing disorders in learning disabilities and in the large family of neuro-developmental disorders. The interactions on plantar tactile information and visuo-spatial and multisensory integration (audio-tactile sensory information on vision) are evaluated. The influence of the plantar modality on motor control, spatial localisation and sensory integration exposes the aim to obtain the concordance into all those sensory modalities to perform the sensory integration and then the learning capacities. The clinical reasoning leading to diagnoses of foot insoles and stimuli enabling all the auditory-visual sensory signals to be concordant are explained in order to make podiatric treatment as effective as possible in both sitting situations (the most frequent situation during school learning) and standing situations (motor learning).

 Keywords: Podiatry; Neuro Developmental Disorders; Sensory Integration Disorders; Sensory Processing Disorders; Proprioceptive Dysfunction Syndrome; Coherence Audio-Tactile; Dyslexia; Vertical Heterophoria Labile; Insoles; Multi-Sensory Integration

1. Sharfi K., et al. “Relationships between executive functions and sensory patterns among adults with specific learning disabilities as reflected in their daily functioning”. PLoS One4 (2022): e0266385.
2. Yu L., et al. “Understanding foot loading and balance behavior of children with motor sensory processing disorder”. Children3 (2022): 379.
3. Quercia P. “Dossier Dysproprioception”. Réalités Ophtalmologiques321 (2025): 10-45.
4. Nurse MA and Nigg BM. “The effect of changes in foot sensation on plantar pressure and muscle activity”. Clinical Biomechanics9 (2001): 719-727.
5. Strzalkowski NDJ., et al. “Cutaneous afferent innervation of the human foot sole: What can we learn from single-unit recordings?” Journal of Neurophysiology 3 (2018): 1233-1246.
6. Andersen OK., et al. “Foot-sole reflex receptive fields for human withdrawal reflexes in symmetrical standing position”. Experimental Brain Research 4 (2003): 434-443.
7. Fallon JB., et al. “Evidence for strong synaptic coupling between single tactile afferents from the sole of the foot and motoneurons supplying leg muscles”. Journal of Neurophysiology 6 (2005): 3795-3804.
8. Nakajima T., et al. “Location specificity of plantar cutaneous reflexes involving lower limb muscles in humans”. Experimental Brain Research 3 (2006): 514-525.
9. Macefield VG. “Talking about good vibrations”. Journal of Physiology 10 (2022): 2269-2270.
10. Gill G., et al. “Location-specific cutaneous electrical stimulation of the footsole modulates corticospinal excitability to the plantar flexors and dorsiflexors during standing”. Physiological Reports 13 (2022): e15240.
11. Kröger S. “Experimental Physiology special issue: 'Mechanotransduction, muscle spindles and proprioception'”. Experimental Physiology 1 (2024): 1-5.
12. Grünbaum T and Christensen MS. “The functional role of conscious sensation of movement”. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 164 (2024): 105813.
13. Toso A., et al. “A sensory integration account for time perception”. PLOS Computational Biology 1 (2021): e1008668.
14. Camarata S., et al. “Evaluating sensory integration/sensory processing treatment: issues and analysis”. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience 14 (202): 556660.
15. Virlet L. “Proprioception et dysprorioception: de la physiologie au tableau Clinique”. Réalités Ophtalmologiques 321 (2025): 18-23.
16. Naim S., et al. “Sensory integration of the proprioceptive sensory system of children with intellectual disabilities”. Journal of Health Sciences1 (2025).
17. Janin A., et al. “Posturodynamic 6 test: a new scoring method for effective communication of results”. International Journal of Clinical Medicine1 (2016): 77-83.
18. Matheron E. “Management of non-contact injuries, nonspecific chronic pain, and prevention via sensory conflicts detection: vertical heterophoria as a landmark indicator”. Journal of Novel Physiotherapy and Physical Rehabilitation 8 (2024): 005-013.
19. Loureau S., et al. “Do changes on the plantar system impact the binocular fusion?”. Movement and Sport Sciences 122 (2023): 53-61.
20. Janin M. “Comparison of short and long clinical perceptive Maddox assessments for the evaluation of the contribution of the podal modality in sensory integration disorders and dys proprioception syndrome. What are the differences? what is the use in current practice?”. EC Neurology3 (2022): 01-08.
21. Quercia P., et al. “Alteration in binocular fusion modifies audiovisual integration in children”. Clinical Ophthalmology 13 (2019): 1137-1145.
22. Quercia P., et al. “Children with dyslexia have altered cross-modal processing linked to binocular fusion. A pilot study”. Clinical Ophthalmology 14 (2020): 437-448.
23. Goldstein-Marcusohn Y., et al. “Global and local visual processing in rate/accuracy subtypes of dyslexia”. Frontiers in Psychology 11 (2020): 828.
24. Mukhtar I., et al. “Age-matched comparative analysis of binocular vision anomalies among children with dyslexia in northern Nigeria”. Pediatric Reports 3 (2024): 566-578.
25. Ibrahim IW., et al. “Investigation of knee flexion angle influences on intra-body communication’s (IBC) signal attenuation”. Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science 2 (2018).
26. Bartonek Å., et al. “Evaluation of knee position sense in children with motor disabilities and children with typical development: a cross-sectional study”. Children6 (2023): 1056.
27. Weissbach A., et al. “Perception-action integration is altered in functional movement disorders”. Movement Disorders 8 (2023): 1399-1409.
28. Vékony T., et al. “Modality-specific and modality-independent neural representations work in concert in predictive processes during sequence learning”. Cerebral Cortex 12 (2023): 7783-7796.
29. Janin M., et al. “Does gravitational orientation influences the vertical heterophoria lability?” FENS Forum (2024): PS02-26PM-43.
30. Xu J., et al. “Noise-rearing disrupts the maturation of multisensory integration”. European Journal of Neuroscience 4 (2014): 602-613.
31. Hancock R., et al. “Neural noise hypothesis of developmental dyslexia”. Cognitive Science 6 (2017): 434-448.