04/29/2026    

RESPONSES/COMMENTS (PODIATRIC RESEARCH)

RE: Podiatric Research 

From: Rod Tomczak, DPM, MD, EdD

 

In 1992, before some of our current DPMs were born, I either got a phone call or ran inro Allen Jacobs, DPM. He said that he was looking over the table of contents of the most recent Journal of Foot Surgery the progenitor of JFAS. He said when he saw the word “Meta-Analysis" in the title of one of the articles, he was certain that I had written the article before confirming it by reading the name of the author. The article has been used in malpractice cases. When questioned by plaintiffs’ attorneys, I responded, “It says what it says.” When the defense attorneys ask questions, I suggest that in this case, the meta-analysis suggests that within certain parameters, the choice of first metatarsal osteotomies is the “surgeon’s choice.”

 

One can argue that, hopefully, this article saved money for fellow podiatrists. Consider the place a meta-analysis holds today in the hierarchy of evidence-based medicine. It is at the top or very near the top of the pyramid. To say research by podiatry schools, their faculty, and students is almost impossible because of the cost and lack of funding might not be totally correct.

 

Writing that meta-analysis article costs nothing, $0.00, Zip. The one student and I spent a lot of time reading the numerous articles, constructing inclusion and exclusion criteria, and performing the calculations to come up with no practical significance between a surgeon’s choice of metatarsal osteotomies. Other authors will tell you it takes time, a lot of time to get results, and it does. But industry doesn’t have to support the work with questionable funds. 

 

Rod Tomczak, DPM, , MD, EdD, Columbus, OH

Other messages in this thread:

---

04/30/2026    

RESPONSES/COMMENTS (PODIATRIC RESEARCH)

RE: Podiatric Research (Rod Tomczak, DPM, MD, EdD)

From: Peter Sorensen, DPM

 

I'd like to add my perspective as a resident involved in current research. I coordinate research for the 12 residents at our program. We have about ten current projects. I agree that the administrative burden is a lot when in residency, but what we have found to be our biggest challenge as residents is a lack of longitudinal data sets. I have finished up projects that residents started five years ago. Once they begin practice, the residency research project gets put on the shelf to hopefully be taken up by a younger resident class. I have started a prospective study here with an attending as Primary Investigator. IRB approval took 8 months. Enrollment will take another year, then an additional six months for post-op data collection. I'll be fresh into practice when it's time to wrap this up - who knows if I'll be able to finish it up? 

 

Many podiatry residents are not just willing to do research, we are eager to do so! We CAN find the time. We just don't always have data for the projects we are actually interested in. So what's the solution? Enter the National Foot and Ankle Registry (NFAR). Fairly recently, ACFAS launched it. It is a data registry for foot and ankle surgeons with modules currently covering ankle arthritis, ankle fracture, hammertoe, and hallux valgus; standardized outcomes, PROs, complications, length of stay, etc. The goal is to have structured data that actually allows meaningful comparison across sites. Some regions are subsidizing first-year fees to help new sites to get started. I think this is a HUGE step towards real, impactful research being published in our field. The infrastructure has been built; now we need mass participation. Please go check it out and consider participating! Current and future residents will thank you for it.

 

Peter Sorensen, DPM, Indianapolis, IN