Mobile Apps for Foot Measurement in Pedorthic Practice: Scoping Review

Background As the use of smartphones increases globally across various fields of research and technology, significant contributions to the sectors related to health, specifically foot health, can be observed. Numerous smartphone apps are now being used for providing accurate information about various foot-related properties. Corresponding to this abundance of foot scanning and measuring apps available in app stores, there is a need for evaluating these apps, as limited information regarding their evidence-based quality is available. Objective The aim of this review was to assess the measurement techniques and essential software quality characteristics of mobile foot measurement apps, and to determine their potential as commercial tools used by foot care health professionals, to assist in measuring feet for custom shoes, and for individuals to enhance their awareness of foot health and hygiene to ultimately prevent foot-related problems. Methods An electronic search across Android and iOS app stores was performed between July and August 2020 to identify apps related to foot measurement and general foot health. The selected apps were rated by three independent raters, and all discrepancies were resolved by discussion among raters and other investigators. Based on previous work on app rating tools, a modified rating scale tool was devised to rate the selected apps. The internal consistency of the rating tool was tested with a group of three people who rated the selected apps over 2-3 weeks. This scale was then used to produce evaluation scores for the selected foot measurement apps and to assess the interrater reliability. Results Evaluation inferences showed that all apps failed to meet even half of the measurement-specific criteria required for the proper manufacturing of custom-made footwear. Only 23% (6/26) of the apps reportedly used external scanners or advanced algorithms to reconstruct 3D models of a user’s foot that could possibly be used for ordering custom-made footwear (shoes, insoles/orthoses), and medical casts to fit irregular foot sizes and shapes. The apps had varying levels of performance and usability, although the overall measurement functionality was subpar with a mean of 1.93 out of 5. Apps linked to online shops and stores (shoe recommendation) were assessed to be more usable than other apps but lacked some features (eg, custom shoe sizes and shapes). Overall, the current apps available for foot measurement do not follow any specific guidelines for measurement purposes. Conclusions Most commercial apps currently available in app stores are not viable for use as tools in assisting foot care health professionals or individuals to measure their feet for custom-made footwear. Current apps lack software quality characteristics and need significant improvements to facilitate proper measurement, enhance awareness of foot health, and induce motivation to prevent and cure foot-related problems. Guidelines similar to the essential criteria items introduced in this study need to be developed for future apps aimed at foot measurement for custom-made or individually fitted footwear and to create awareness of foot health.

[1]  Jason Geng,et al.  Structured-light 3D surface imaging: a tutorial , 2011 .

[2]  D. Rodríguez-Sanz,et al.  Evaluation of foot health related quality of life in individuals with foot problems by gender: a cross-sectional comparative analysis study , 2018, BMJ Open.

[3]  Robert D. McLeod,et al.  A mHealth Application for Chronic Wound Care: Findings of a User Trial , 2013, International journal of environmental research and public health.

[4]  Alexander Ilic,et al.  FinMARS: A Mobile App Rating Scale for Finance Apps , 2019, ICICM 2019.

[5]  Ravindra S. Goonetilleke,et al.  Foot Shape Modeling , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[6]  Stoyan R. Stoyanov,et al.  Development and Validation of the User Version of the Mobile Application Rating Scale (uMARS) , 2016, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[7]  D. Janisse,et al.  Pedorthic management of the diabetic foot , 2015, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[8]  Brian Godman,et al.  Efficacy of Mobile Apps to Support the Care of Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials , 2017, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[9]  F. Faux,et al.  Smartphone-Based Collaborative System for Wounds Tracking , 2016, eTELEMED 2016.

[10]  N. Arden,et al.  Evidence for current recommendations concerning the management of foot health for people with chronic long-term conditions: a systematic review , 2017, Journal of Foot and Ankle Research.

[11]  Oksana Zelenko,et al.  Mobile App Rating Scale: A New Tool for Assessing the Quality of Health Mobile Apps , 2015, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[12]  James Woodburn,et al.  The use of 3D surface scanning for the measurement and assessment of the human foot , 2010, Journal of foot and ankle research.

[13]  Jörg Becker,et al.  The impact of transparency on mobile privacy decision making , 2019, Electron. Mark..

[14]  L. Whitehead,et al.  The Effectiveness of Self-Management Mobile Phone and Tablet Apps in Long-term Condition Management: A Systematic Review , 2016, Journal of medical Internet research.

[15]  M. V. van Velthoven,et al.  Mobile Apps for Health Behavior Change in Physical Activity, Diet, Drug and Alcohol Use, and Mental Health: Systematic Review , 2020, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[16]  Anu Kankainen,et al.  Usability testing of mobile applications: a comparison between laboratory and field testing , 2005 .

[17]  Chen Peng,et al.  A 3D foot shape feature parameter measurement algorithm based on Kinect2 , 2018, EURASIP J. Image Video Process..

[18]  K Baba Foot measurement for shoe construction with reference to the relationship between foot length, foot breadth, and ball girth. , 1974, Journal of human ergology.

[19]  Peng Li,et al.  Segmenting 3D surface scan data of the human body by 2D projection , 2000, Electronic Imaging.

[20]  F. McKay,et al.  Using Health and Well-Being Apps for Behavior Change: A Systematic Search and Rating of Apps , 2019, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[21]  Sara Lazzari,et al.  3D range optical sensor: analysis of the measurement errors and development of procedures for their compensation , 1998, Electronic Imaging.

[22]  Wen Liu Accuracy and reliability of a technique for quantifying foot shape, dimensions and structural characteristics , 1999 .

[23]  John Torous,et al.  Clinical review of user engagement with mental health smartphone apps: evidence, theory and improvements , 2018, Evidence Based Journals.

[24]  Evgeniya S. Georgieva,et al.  Evaluation of mobile learning system , 2011, WCIT.

[25]  Paul A. Butterworth,et al.  Footwear and insole design features that reduce neuropathic plantar forefoot ulcer risk in people with diabetes: a systematic literature review , 2020, Journal of Foot and Ankle Research.

[26]  Tamara L. Vos-Draper Poster 29 Wireless Seat Interface Pressure Mapping on a Smartphone: Feasibility Study in Users with SCI , 2013 .

[27]  A. Graham,et al.  Guidelines for the management of the foot health problems associated with rheumatoid arthritis. , 2011, Musculoskeletal Care.

[28]  C. Vandelanotte,et al.  Efficacy of interventions that use apps to improve diet, physical activity and sedentary behaviour: a systematic review , 2016, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.

[29]  Marcia R. Friesen,et al.  Algorithms for Size and Color Detection of Smartphone Images of Chronic Wounds for Healthcare Applications , 2015, IEEE Access.

[30]  Jordan Rivera,et al.  Mobile Apps for Weight Management: A Scoping Review , 2016, JMIR mHealth and uHealth.

[31]  A. Boulton,et al.  The global burden of diabetic foot disease , 2005, The Lancet.

[32]  Kon Mouzakis,et al.  A preliminary analysis of mobile app user reviews , 2012, OZCHI.

[33]  Gitte Lindgaard,et al.  Early traces of usability as a science and as a profession , 2009, Interact. Comput..

[34]  L. Cronbach Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[35]  D. Cicchetti Guidelines, Criteria, and Rules of Thumb for Evaluating Normed and Standardized Assessment Instruments in Psychology. , 1994 .