Perspectives for clinical measures of dynamic foot function-reference data and methodological considerations.

Several studies have investigated if static posture assessments qualify to predict dynamic function of the foot showing diverse outcomes. However, it was suggested that dynamic measures may be better suited to predict foot-related overuse problems. The purpose of this study was to establish the reliability for dynamic measures of longitudinal arch angle (LAA) and navicular height (NH) and to examine to what extent static and dynamic measures thereof are related. Intra-rater reliability of LAA and NH measures was tested on a sample of 17 control subjects. Subsequently, 79 subjects were tested while walking on a treadmill. The ranges and minimum values for LAA and NH during ground contact were identified over 20 consecutive steps. A geometric error model was used to simulate effects of marker placement uncertainty and skin movement artifacts. Results demonstrated the highest reliability for the minimum NH (MinNH), followed by the minimum LAA (MinLAA), the dynamic range of navicular height (DeltaNH) and the range of LAA (DeltaLAA) while all measures were highly reliable. Marker location uncertainty and skin movement artifacts had the smallest effects on measures of NH. The use of an alignment device for marker placement was shown to reduce error ranges for NH measures. Therefore, DeltaNH and MinNH were recommended for functional dynamic foot characterization in the sagittal plane. There is potential for such measures to be a suitable predictor for overuse injuries while being obtainable in clinical settings. Future research needs to include such dynamic but simple foot assessments in large-scale clinical studies.

[1]  D A Nawoczenski,et al.  Measurement of the medial longitudinal arch. , 1995, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[2]  A. Lundberg,et al.  Ankle and Subtalar Kinematics Measured with Intracortical Pins during the Stance Phase of Walking , 2004, Foot & ankle international.

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

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

[5]  T G McPoil,et al.  Relationship between three static angles of the rearfoot and the pattern of rearfoot motion during walking. , 1996, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[6]  B M Nigg,et al.  Three-dimensional measurement of rearfoot motion during running. , 1990, Journal of biomechanics.

[7]  M T Gross,et al.  Intraexaminer reliability, interexaminer reliability, and mean values for nine lower extremity skeletal measures in healthy naval midshipmen. , 1997, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[8]  H. M. Sommer,et al.  Effect of foot posture on the incidence of medial tibial stress syndrome. , 1995, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[9]  M. Cornwall,et al.  Prediction of dynamic foot posture during running using the longitudinal arch angle. , 2007, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[10]  A Arndt,et al.  Functional units of the human foot. , 2008, Gait & posture.

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

[12]  W. Sanner,et al.  Alternative techniques for the clinical assessment of foot pronation. , 1998, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

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

[14]  Richard Smith,et al.  Medial Longitudinal Arch of the Foot: Stationary Versus Walking Measures , 1999, Foot & ankle international.

[15]  A. Lundberg,et al.  Foot kinematics during walking measured using bone and surface mounted markers. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[16]  G. Davies,et al.  Orthopaedic and sports physical therapy , 1985 .

[17]  Adrienne E Hunt,et al.  Static measures of calcaneal deviation and arch angle as predictors of rearfoot motion during walking. , 2000, The Australian journal of physiotherapy.

[18]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  M. Cornwall,et al.  The relationship between static lower extremity measurements and rearfoot motion during walking. , 1996, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[20]  Karsten Jensen,et al.  A New Motion Capture System For Automated Gait Analysis Based On Multi Video Sequence Analysis , 2008 .

[21]  Mohsen Razeghi,et al.  Foot type classification: a critical review of current methods. , 2002, Gait & posture.

[22]  M. Cornwall,et al.  Use of the longitudinal arch angle to predict dynamic foot posture in walking. , 2005, Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association.

[23]  Dan Karlsson,et al.  The relative skin movement of the foot: a 2-D roentgen photogrammetry study. , 1998, Clinical biomechanics.