Reliability of Measuring Morphology of the Paediatric Foot Using the Artec Eva Hand Held Scanner

The growth and development of the paediatric foot throughout childhood is poorly understood. To inform theory that underpins clinical practice, there is a clear need to revisit our understanding of how the foot develops. Hand-held 3-D scanners provide portability and allow researchers to collect data about foot development in the children’s natural environment. However, there are methodological challenges to consider: scanning the plantar surface in a static weight-bearing position, the children’s ability to remain static for the duration of the scanning and software capabilities. The aim of this study was to determine the reliability of using a hand-held scanner to capture children’s foot shape and size. For this study, 15 children aged two years (Group 1: n=5), five years (Group 2: n=5) and seven years (Group 3: n=5) were recruited. Children stood barefoot in a comfortable bipedal stance, on a Perspex platform of 550mm height. Their feet were scanned three times, including the plantar surface through the platform, using the Artec Eva (Artec Group, Luxembourg, Luxembourg) hand held scanner. Postprocessing of the scans was performed in Artec Studio 12 (Artec Group, Luxembourg, Luxembourg). Data processing and statistical analysis of 3D data were performed in Matlab R2018a (The Mathworks, Natuck, USA), while linear measures were calculated in Foot3D (INESCOP, Elda, Spain). To assess reliability, root mean square error (RMSE) of 11 linear measurements, mesh deviations (Euclidean distances) of the 3D coordinates of corresponding vertices (after rigid registration of the meshes) [5] and RMSE for shape-index (SI) and curvedness (CU) [6] were calculated. Results showed good reliability for eight linear measures with an average RMSE of 1.14mm across groups and all measures (RMSE range: 0.19mm 3.73mm). Three measures exceeded a RMSE of 2mm, two of which were from Group 1. Mesh deviation results showed good reliability in the older children (Group 2: deviations under 0.5mm: 73.03%, under 1mm: 94.12%, Group 3: deviations under 0.5mm: 68.82%, under 1mm: 96.20%), but not in the youngest group (deviations under 0.5mm: 53.19%, under 1mm: 85.83%). The heat maps of mesh deviations across the foot surface, indicate increasing mesh deviations in the toe and ankle area from Group 3 to Group 2, while Group 1 also had higher than 1mm deviations on the lateral and dorsal surface of the foot. Root mean square error for curvedness and shape-index for the 3 scans of the same foot decreased with increasing age, but in general indicated good reliability. The results of this study demonstrated that the hand-held scanner was reliable for capturing children’s 3D foot shape, however there were methodological issues in the youngest group. In Group 1, the mesh deviation results demonstrated lower reliability in four distinct areas (toes, lateral and dorsal surface and ankle). The higher mesh deviations were a result of these children being unable to stand still for the duration of the scan and having a more variable stance on the platform between scans. The fact that the RMSE of two linear measures exceeded 2mm in the youngest group also supported this proposal. Future studies employing hand held 3D scanners should consider these results and handle 3D scanning data of two years old children with caution.

[1]  Ravindra S. Goonetilleke,et al.  Foot deformations under different load-bearing conditions and their relationships to stature and body weight , 2009 .

[2]  Yu-Chi Lee,et al.  Taiwanese adult foot shape classification using 3D scanning data , 2015, Ergonomics.

[3]  T. Horstmann,et al.  Foot morphology of normal, underweight and overweight children , 2008, International Journal of Obesity.

[4]  H. Menz,et al.  Two feet, or one person? Problems associated with statistical analysis of paired data in foot and ankle medicine , 2004 .

[5]  Marleta Reynolds,et al.  A novel technique to measure severity of pediatric pectus excavatum using white light scanning. , 2019, Journal of pediatric surgery.

[6]  Makiko Kouchi,et al.  Foot Dimensions and Foot Shape: Differences Due to Growth, Generation and Ethnic Origin , 1998 .

[7]  David Cohen-Steiner,et al.  Restricted delaunay triangulations and normal cycle , 2003, SCG '03.

[8]  Joanne Yip,et al.  Developing a three-dimensional (3D) assessment method for clubfoot , 2018 .

[9]  Jari Pallari,et al.  Measurements agreement between low-cost and high-level handheld 3D scanners to scan the knee for designing a 3D printed knee brace , 2018, PloS one.

[10]  Gérard G. Medioni,et al.  Object modelling by registration of multiple range images , 1992, Image Vis. Comput..

[11]  D. Boone,et al.  Quantitative comparison of plantar foot shapes under different weight-bearing conditions. , 2003, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[12]  Nachiappan Chockalingam,et al.  The relationship between arch height and foot length: Implications for size grading. , 2017, Applied ergonomics.

[13]  Cylie M. Williams,et al.  Paediatric flexible flat foot: how are we measuring it and are we getting it right? A systematic review , 2018, Journal of Foot and Ankle Research.

[14]  R. Sawatzky,et al.  Use of Hand-held Laser Scanning and 3D Printing for Creation of a Museum Exhibit. , 2005 .

[15]  C. Nester,et al.  Foot dimensions and morphology in healthy weight, overweight and obese males. , 2016, Clinical biomechanics.

[16]  Pierre Alliez,et al.  Anisotropic polygonal remeshing , 2003, ACM Trans. Graph..

[17]  Gangming Luo,et al.  Changes in male foot shape and size with weightbearing. , 2006, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[18]  H. Park,et al.  Use of hand-held laser scanning in the assessment of craniometry. , 2006, Forensic science international.

[19]  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.

[20]  H. A. El-Talawy,et al.  Validation of normalized truncated navicular height as a clinical assessment measure of static foot posture to determine flatfoot in children and adolescents: A cross sectional study. , 2018, Foot.

[21]  Xiang Liu,et al.  3D characterization and localization of anatomical landmarks of the foot by FastSCAN , 2004, Real Time Imaging.

[22]  R. Causby,et al.  The typically developing paediatric foot: how flat should it be? A systematic review , 2017, Journal of Foot and Ankle Research.

[23]  D. Altman,et al.  Statistics notes: Measurement error , 1996 .

[24]  Lucy Armitage,et al.  Reliability and validity of the iSense optical scanner for measuring volume of transtibial residual limb models , 2019, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[25]  Andrea J. van Doorn,et al.  Surface shape and curvature scales , 1992, Image Vis. Comput..

[26]  Y. Toyama,et al.  Standard growth of the foot arch in childhood and adolescence--derived from the measurement results of 10,155 children. , 2014, Foot and ankle surgery : official journal of the European Society of Foot and Ankle Surgeons.

[27]  Ravindra S. Goonetilleke,et al.  An automatic method of measuring foot girths for custom footwear using local RBF implicit surfaces , 2010, Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf..

[28]  Clayton J Adam,et al.  Accuracy of 3D surface scanners for clinical torso and spinal deformity assessment. , 2019, Medical engineering & physics.

[29]  M. Mauch,et al.  A new approach to children's footwear based on foot type classification , 2009, Ergonomics.

[30]  Vimal Dhokia,et al.  Validity and reliability of a novel 3D scanner for assessment of the shape and volume of amputees’ residual limb models , 2017, PloS one.

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

[32]  L. Alegre,et al.  Foot morphology in normal-weight, overweight, and obese schoolchildren , 2013, European Journal of Pediatrics.

[33]  F. Su,et al.  Three-dimensional measurement of foot arch in preschool children , 2012, BioMedical Engineering OnLine.

[34]  Christian Klein,et al.  Increased hallux angle in children and its association with insufficient length of footwear: A community based cross-sectional study , 2009, BMC musculoskeletal disorders.

[35]  Kit-Lun Yick,et al.  Validation of a 3D foot scanning system for evaluation of forefoot shape with elevated heels , 2017 .

[36]  C. Hunter,et al.  Measuring the impact of surgical intervention on pediatric pectus excavatum using white light scanning. , 2019, Journal of pediatric surgery.

[37]  Paul J. Besl,et al.  A Method for Registration of 3-D Shapes , 1992, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[38]  Richard M. Smith,et al.  The reliability and validity of a three-camera foot image system for obtaining foot anthropometrics. , 2010, Journal of applied biomechanics.

[39]  Y. Burns,et al.  The Measurement of the Medial Longitudinal Arch in Children , 2001, Foot & ankle international.