Sex-related differences in foot shape of adult Caucasians – a follow-up study focusing on long and short feet

The study's purpose was to substantiate findings on sex-related differences in foot morphology focusing on fringe sizes. Altogether, 287 Caucasian adults with long or short feet were scanned. Data were analysed together with data from 847 subjects from a previous study with comparable inclusion criteria and anthropometric data by: (1)comparing absolute measures within 237–277 mm foot length (FL); (2) comparing averaged measures across sizes in % of foot length for 203–323mm FL; (3) reclassifying the additional subjects into a previously defined foot type classification. Male feet were wider and higher for the same FL. Averaged across sizes, no relevant differences between sexes were found for widths and heights. Slender or flat-pointed foot types were more common in longer feet, shorter feet tended to be bigger. Definitions for ‘long’ and ‘short’ are sex-related with an offset of three shoe sizes (EU). Results of this follow-up study on long and short feet can substantiate previous findings mainly described for the most common sizes. Statement of Relevance: Improper footwear can cause pain and injury and proper fit is a major criterion for shoe buyers. Knowledge about sex-related differences in foot shape is important for shoe design. This study supplements the field of knowledge for very small and large feet.

[1]  Juan Carlos González,et al.  A Footwear Fit Classification Model Based on Anthropometric Data , 2006 .

[2]  L. Kos,et al.  A SYSTEM FOR FOOTWEAR FITTING ANALYSIS , 2002 .

[3]  A. Turgut,et al.  Stature and sex estimate using foot and shoe dimensions. , 2005, Forensic science international.

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

[5]  Ravindra S. Goonetilleke,et al.  Foot measurements from three-dimensional scans: A comparison and evaluation of different methods , 2006 .

[6]  Sex Differences in Relative Foot Length and Perceived Attractiveness of Female Feet: Relationships among Anthropometry, Physique, and Preference Ratings , 2007, Perceptual and motor skills.

[7]  J. Baumhauer,et al.  Sexual dimorphism of the foot and ankle. , 2006, The Orthopedic clinics of North America.

[8]  Ravindra S. Goonetilleke,et al.  Modelling foot height and foot shape-related dimensions , 2008, Ergonomics.

[9]  D. Fessler,et al.  Sexual dimorphism in foot length proportionate to stature , 2005, Annals of human biology.

[10]  Stefan Grau,et al.  Do the feet of German and Australian children differ in structure? Implications for children's shoe design , 2008, Ergonomics.

[11]  K Ashizawa,et al.  Relative foot size and shape to general body size in Javanese, Filipinas and Japanese with special reference to habitual footwear types. , 1997, Annals of human biology.

[12]  T. Peker,et al.  An examination of the relationship between foot length, foot breath, ball girth, height and weight of Turkish university students aged between 17 and 25. , 1997, Anthropologischer Anzeiger; Bericht uber die biologisch-anthropologische Literatur.

[13]  Gangming Luo,et al.  Comparison of male and female foot shape. , 2009, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[14]  Hylton B Menz,et al.  Age-related differences in foot structure and function. , 2007, Gait & posture.

[15]  Masahiro Kurosaka,et al.  The effects of shoe fit on gait in community-dwelling older adults. , 2010, Gait & posture.

[16]  P. Cavanagh,et al.  Gender differences in adult foot shape: implications for shoe design. , 2001, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[17]  C. Maiwald,et al.  Sex-related differences in foot shape , 2008, Ergonomics.

[18]  C. Frey.  Foot health and shoewear for women. , 2000, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[19]  M Mochimaru,et al.  Analysis of 3-D human foot forms using the Free Form Deformation method and its application in grading shoe lasts , 2000, Ergonomics.

[20]  Suk-Gill Jung,et al.  A Classification of Foot Types for Designing Footwear of the Korean Elderly , 2001 .

[21]  Ravindra S. Goonetilleke,et al.  The Quality of Footwear Fit: What we know, don't know and should know , 2000 .

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

[23]  M. Morris,et al.  Footwear Characteristics and Foot Problems in Older People , 2005, Gerontology.

[24]  Gordon Valiant,et al.  Comparison of Female Foot Morphology and Last Design in Athletic Footwear—Are Men's Lasts Appropriate for Women? , 2010, Research in sports medicine.

[25]  P. Dhara,et al.  A comparative study of foot dimension between adult male and female and evaluation of foot hazards due to using of footwear. , 2001, Journal of physiological anthropology and applied human science.

[26]  Ravindra S. Goonetilleke,et al.  Designing for Comfort: A Footwear Application , 2001 .

[27]  S Quine,et al.  Shoe concerns and foot problems of wearers of safety footwear. , 1993, Occupational medicine.