by Jarrod Shapiro, DPM Joined practice July 2006 of John K Throckmorton, DPM Lansing, Michigan

The other day I was very surprised to receive a new podiatric journal called Foot and Ankle Specialist.  At first I thought, “Do we really need another journal?”  A very few seconds later, the answer came back a resounding YES.  As you all know podiatry has two research oriented publications, JAPMA and JFAS.  Critics of these journals have argued they have limited utility due to their lack of Level 1 randomized controlled research.  So, here's another journal that seems to be trying to break new ground. This journal is co-edited ame me a journal that represents both podiatry and orthby Babak Baravarian, DPM (podiatry) and Gregory Berlex, MD (orthopedics). Nopedics. A further mix of representation is evident from the editorial board which is a combination of very notable podiatric and orthopedic physicians as well as physical therapy and pedorthics.

This assortment of representation has the potential to bridge that well known gap between orthopedics and podiatry.

The diminutive size of this first issue hides the significant content within its 50 pages. The topics range from clinical research (including the Lisfranc anatomy to pressure sensation in peripheral neuropathy to radiofrequency coblation for plantar fasciitis) to clinical reviews (surgical management of diabetic foot infections) to expert discussions.

Although no randomized controlled trials were included, the topics were thought provoking, thorough, and well presented with quality graphics. Amazingly, they managed to include COLOR photos and graphs.

For those of you who've been reading these editorials you know I can't be completely happy with anything. So, in light of being critical of everything we as physicians read, I did manage to find a few editorial mistakes, one of which I find significant enough to mention here. In "Anatomy of the Lisfranc Ligament" figure 5 on page 23 contains an image of the Lisfranc joint complex which is incorrectly drawn and labeled. The navicular and talus are placed in the lateral column and the cuboid is absent. This may seem like a small issue. However, an article on ANATOMY should not incorrectly label an image about anatomy!

I also found myself wondering why Dr Chang's text Master Techniques in Podiatric Surgery: The Foot and Ankle was reviewed. This text was written four years ago! It's been reviewed extensively in other journals. We all know how useful it is. It seems just about every resident and new practicing physician already has a copy. So why review it? After checking for conflicts of interest I was not able to find any connection between Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (Dr Chang's publisher) and Sage Publishing.

The roundtable discussion about plantar fasciitis predicted correctly, in my opinion, the direction surgical treatment for plantar fasciitis/fasciosis will be heading in the future. I also appreciated the out-of-the-box thinking behind "A Retrospective Review of Immediate Weightbearing After First Metatarsophalangeal Joint Arthrodesis." Why do we nonweightbear so many of our procedures? It's usually because we were taught these methods by our attending, rather than true evidence-based conclusions. This article hints that immediate postop weightbearing may not affect union rates as much as we may think. I only wish this was a prospective, randomized, well powered study.

All in all, I'd say this is a very impressive debut issue for a journal with a significant potential for contribution to the podiatric and orthopedic literature. And it's free!! Bravo!


Jarrod Shapiro, DPM
PRESENT New Docs Editor
[email protected]