What exactly goes wrong when someone wearing braces uses a regular shoehorn?
Share
Short answer: Dominic describes the specific mechanical failure of a conventional shoehorn when used by someone wearing a leg brace. Because standard shoehorns are thin, they are difficult to navigate into position, and the angle of attack needed to get the brace into the shoe is hard to achieve. The narrow shape means the shoehorn moves around rather than staying stable, which forces the user into repeated guessing and adjustment. He contrasts this with the Bracehorn, which is placed directly into position and, because of its concave shape and the way the heel counter sits against it, guides the foot and brace straight through into the shoe. The result is a single smooth motion instead of the wiggling and repositioning a thin shoehorn requires, which is what makes putting the shoe on significantly easier.
In Dominic's words
As I said earlier, the regular thinner shoehorn is hard to navigate. When you are trying to put it in, the angle of attack is not easy, because they are so skinny that they are just kind of moving around on you. Whereas with the Bracehorn, you just put it right in, and because of the concave shape and the way the heel counter sits against it, it just guides you right through.
So it makes it so much easier to put the shoes on. That is really the difference. With a thin shoehorn you are guessing at the angle, the shoehorn is shifting around while you are trying to work, and you end up making several attempts before the brace goes in.
With the Bracehorn it is one smooth motion. The shape holds its position, the heel counter sits where it is supposed to sit, and the brace follows the guide down into the shoe instead of you having to fight it in.