Contact force ratio: A new parameter to assess foot arch function

Static footprint parameters have been used to quantify arch height with conflicting results. This could be caused by the inherent inaccuracy and variations of the methodology used. Since the foot is a dynamic structure that undergoes changes during a step, it is more desirable to capture and analyse the dynamic footprint at an instant during the gait cycle that can most closely reflect the weight-bearing foot function. Forty (40) volunteer subjects were recruited for the reliability test of a new parameter, the Contact Force Ratio (CFR), derived from dynamic footprint. This is a measure of midfoot loading during gait. The mid-gait dynamic footprints were collected using a pressure sensing mat. Results of ICC tests showed that the CFR had good intratester (0.918) and intertester (0.909) reliability. The validity of the method was examined by correlating the parameter to the functional change in arch height, i.e. the Navicular Drop between the non-weight-bearing and weight-bearing conditions.

[1]  M. Cornwall,et al.  Relative Movement of the Navicular Bone During Normal Walking , 1999, Foot & ankle international.

[2]  T G McPoil,et al.  Three-dimensional movement of the foot during the stance phase of walking. , 1999, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[3]  Thomas Kirk Cureton,et al.  The Validity of Footprints as a Measure of Vertical Height of the Arch and Functional Efficiency of the Foot , 1935 .

[4]  Matthew J Young,et al.  Arch index as a predictor of arch height , 1997 .

[5]  D. Rosenbaum,et al.  Effects of walking speed on plantar pressure patterns and hindfoot angular motion , 1994 .

[6]  Leslie W. Irwin,et al.  A Study of the Tendency of School Children to Develop Flat-Footedness , 1937 .

[7]  T. Worrell,et al.  Two measurement techniques for assessing subtalar joint position: a reliability study. , 1994, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[8]  M. Cornwall,et al.  Motion of the calcaneus, navicular, and first metatarsal during the stance phase of walking. , 2002, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[9]  T Y Shiang,et al.  Evaluating different footprint parameters as a predictor of arch height. , 1998, IEEE engineering in medicine and biology magazine : the quarterly magazine of the Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society.

[10]  L. Staheli,et al.  The longitudinal arch. A survey of eight hundred and eighty-two feet in normal children and adults. , 1987, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[11]  J. Hamill,et al.  Relationship between selected static an dynamic lower extremity measures , 1989 .

[12]  Thomas G. McPoil,et al.  A comparison of two in-shoe plantar pressupe measurement systems , 1995 .

[13]  J. Woodburn,et al.  Observations on the F-Scan in-shoe pressure measuring system. , 1996, Clinical biomechanics.

[14]  M. Cornwall,et al.  Relationship Between Neutral Subtalar Joint Position and Pattern of Rearfoot Motion During Walking , 1994, Foot & ankle international.

[15]  M. J. Muêller,et al.  Navicular drop as a composite measure of excessive pronation. , 1993, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[16]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  The arch index: a useful measure from footprints. , 1987, Journal of biomechanics.

[17]  Brody Dm,et al.  Techniques in the evaluation and treatment of the injured runner. , 1982 .

[18]  F. Forriol,et al.  Footprint Analysis Between Three and Seventeen Years of Age , 1990, Foot & ankle.

[19]  William Chu,et al.  The Use of Arch A Digital Index to Characterize Arch Height: Image Processing Approach , 1995 .

[20]  R. Olshen,et al.  The development of mature gait. , 1980, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[22]  J. Cobey,et al.  Standardizing Methods of Measurement of Foot Shape by Including the Effects of Subtalar Rotation , 1981, Foot & ankle.

[23]  M. Cornwall,et al.  Comparison of three methods for obtaining plantar pressures in nonpathologic subjects. , 1994, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[24]  T. Worrell,et al.  Reliability of open and closed kinetic chain subtalar joint neutral positions and navicular drop test. , 1993, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[25]  Benno M. Nigg,et al.  Footprint Parameters as a Measure of Arch Height , 1992, Foot & ankle.

[26]  L Klenerman,et al.  Reliability of pressure measurements: the EM ED F system. , 1991, Clinical biomechanics.

[27]  A A Polliack,et al.  Scientific validation of two commercial pressure sensor systems for prosthetic socket fit , 2000, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[28]  S. Urry,et al.  A comparison of gait initiation and termination methods for obtaining plantar foot pressures. , 1999, Gait & posture.

[29]  B. Didia,et al.  The Use of Footprint Contact Index II for Classification of Flat Feet in a Nigerian Population , 1987, Foot & ankle.

[30]  A. Harrison,et al.  Investigation of gait protocols for plantar pressure measurement of non-pathological subjects using a dynamic pedobarograph , 1997 .