Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.
You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Foot Kinematics During a Bilateral Heel Rise Test in Participants With Stage II Posterior Tibial Tendon Dysfunction.
Houck JR, Neville C, Tome J, Flemister AS. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009 Aug;39(8):593-603
Quote:
STUDY DESIGN: Experimental laboratory study using a cross-sectional design.
OBJECTIVES: To compare foot kinematics, using 3-dimensional tracking methods, during a bilateral heel rise between participants with posterior tibial tendon dysfunction (PTTD) and participants with a normal medial longitudinal arch (MLA).
BACKGROUND: The bilateral heel rise test is commonly used to assess patients with PTTD; however, information about foot kinematics during the test is lacking.
METHODS: Forty-five individuals volunteered to participate, including 30 patients diagnosed with unilateral stage II PTTD (mean +/- SD age, 59.8 +/- 11.1 years; body mass index, 29.9 +/- 4.8 kg/m2) and 15 controls (mean +/- SD age, 56.5 +/- 7.7 years; body mass index, 30.6 +/- 3.6 kg/m2). Footkinematic data were collected during a bilateral heel rise task from the calcaneus (hindfoot), first metatarsal, and hallux, using an Optotrak motion analysis system and Motion Monitor software. A 2-way mixed-effects analysis of variance model, with normalized heel height as a covariate, was used to test for significant differences between the normal MLA and PTTD groups.
RESULTS: The patients in the PTTD group exhibited significantly greater ankle plantar flexion (mean difference between groups, 7.3 degrees ; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.1 degrees to 9.5 degrees ), greater first metatarsal dorsiflexion (mean difference between groups, 9.0 degrees ; 95% CI: 3.7 degrees to 14.4 degrees ), and less hallux dorsiflexion (mean difference, 6.7 degrees ; 95% CI: 1.7 degrees to 11.8 degrees ) compared to controls. At peak heel rise, hindfoot inversion was similar (P = .130) between the PTTD and control groups.
CONCLUSION: Except for hindfoot eversion/inversion, the differences in foot kinematics in participants with stage II PTTD, when compared to the control group, mainly occur as an offset, not an alteration in shape, of the kinematic patterns
Re: Heel raise test for posterior tibial dysfunction
What appears to be a different version of the above appeared in JFAR from i-FAB conference:
Comparison of the clinical heel rise test in subjects with Stage II PTTD and healthy controls J Foot Ankle Res. 2008; 1(Suppl 1): O6. Chris Neville, Jeff Houck, Sam Flemister
Quote:
Introduction
The heel rise test is commonly used as a strength test for the triceps surea muscle group but has also become widely used as a functional task to aid in the diagnosis of Posterior Tibial Tendon Dysfunction (PTTD) [1,2]. Although failure to invert the hindfoot during the heel rise test is reported to be a sign of failure in the posterior tibial muscle, posterior tibialis function may also contribute to forefoot plantar flexion, assisting with raising the heel off the floor. Midfoot collapse associated with weakness of the posterior tibialis muscle may limit a PTTD subjects' ability to plantar flex the forefoot during the heel rise test. The purpose of this study was to compare sagittal plane ankle and midfoot kinematics as well as HF frontal plane kinematics in subjects with stage II PTTD and healthy controls during a bilateral heel rise test.
Methods
30 stage II PTTD subjects (age; 59.2 (11.3) years, BMI; 29.8 (4.8)) and 15 healthy controls (58.6 (7.7) years, BMI; 30.5 (3.6)) were included in this study. While subjects performed a bilateral heel rise task, kinematic data was collected (sampled at 60 Hz, filtered at 6 Hz) from the shank, calcaneus (HF), and first metatarsal (FF) using an Optotrak Motion Analysis System (Northern Digital Inc, CAN) and Motion Monitor Software (Innsport Training Inc, USA). Kinematic data were used to calculate Cardan angles (Z-X-Y sequence) including ankle plantar flexion/dorsiflexion (HF relative to the shank), ankle inversion/eversion (HF relative to the shank) and midfoot plantar flexion/dorsiflexion (FF relative to the HF). Statistical Analysis: To compare groups a mixed design ANOVA model with a repeated factor of phase (three levels: start position, peak heel rise position, and ending position) and a fixed factor of group (two levels: PTTD and healthy controls) was utilized.
Results
There was no significant difference (p = 0.11) in sagittal plane ankle motion between subjects with PTTD and healthy controls across all phases of the heel rise test. Interestingly, although subject with PTTD began the heel rise test with greater eversion compared to controls (5 degrees difference p < 0.001) they achieved a position of inversion equal to controls at peak heel rise (1.7 degrees difference p = 0.15). A significant difference between groups in sagittal plane midfoot motion was found to be dependent on phase of the heel rise task (interaction p = 0.05). Pairwise comparisons between groups at each phase revealed a significant (p = 0.03) decrease in midfoot plantar flexion in subjects with PTTD (6.5 degrees) compared to healthy controls (12.1 degrees) at the peak heel rise position.
Conclusion
Raising the heel off the floor during the heel rise test is accomplished with both ankle plantar flexion and midfoot plantar flexion. Significantly reduced midfoot plantar flexion (midfoot collapse) was observed in PTTD subjects compared to healthy controls despite normal HF inversion. Hindfoot inversion may provide some stability to the midtarsal joint limiting midfoot collapse but this relationship is only partially able to protect secondary ligaments. Summary: In this first investigation of the heel rise test failure to plantar flex the midfoot while completing the heel rise test was more common in subjects with stage II PTTD than failure to invert the hindfoot. The ability to stabilize the midfoot with muscle control or joint stability is compromised in subjects with stage II PTTD placing increased demand on support ligaments.
Heel raise test for posterior tibial dysfunction
Linear Mode
