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.
Background
Foot posture is considered to be an important component of musculoskeletal assessment in clinical practice and research. However, many measurement approaches are not suitable for routine use as they are time-consuming or require specialised equipment and/or clinical expertise. The objective of this study was therefore to develop and evaluate a simple visual tool for foot posture assessment based on the arch index (AI) that could be used in clinical and research settings.
Methods
Fully weightbearing footprints from 602 people aged 62 to 96 years were obtained using a carbon paper imprint material, and cut-off AI scores dividing participants into three categories (high, normal and low) were determined using the central limit theorem (i.e. normal = +/ 1 standard deviation from the mean). A visual tool was then created using representative examples for the boundaries of each category. Two examiners were then asked to use the tool to independently grade the footprints of 60 participants (20 for each of the three categories, randomly presented), and then repeat the process two weeks later. Inter- and intra-tester reliability was determined using Spearman's rho, percentage agreement and weighted kappa statistics. The validity of the examiner's assessments was evaluated by comparing their categorisations to the actual AI score using Spearman's rho and analysis of variance (ANOVA), and to the actual AI category using percentage agreement, Spearman's rho and weighted kappa.
Results
Inter- and intra-tester reliability of the examiners was almost perfect (percentage agreement = 93 to 97%; Spearman's rho = 0.91 to 0.95, and weighted kappas = 0.85 to 0.93). Examiners' scores were strongly correlated with actual AI values (Spearman's rho = 0.91 to 0.94 and significant differences between all categories with ANOVA; p < 0.001) and AI categories (percentage agreement = 95 to 98%; Spearman's rho = 0.89 to 0.94, and weighted kappas = 0.87 to 0.94). There was a slight tendency for examiners to categorise participants as having higher arches than their AI scores indicated.
Conclusions
Foot posture can be quickly and reliably categorised as high, normal or low in older people using a simplified visual categorisation tool based on the AI.
The Comparison of Clinical Assessment Tools for the Foot Posture
한국전문물리치료학회
Quote:
It is important to assess foot posture when investigating the relationship between lower extremity dysfunctions and foot types. Although several measurements of static foot posture have been used, there is no consensus regarding clinical measurements for foot posture. The aim of this study is to explore the differences among navicular drift (NDt), foot posture index (FPI), arch index (AI), dorsal arch height ratio (DAHR), normal navicular height truncated (NNHt) and to discover the most effective measurement. After foot types were classified by navicular drop test (NDp), clinical measurements of NDt, FPI, AI, DAHR, and NNHt were performed on 64 subjects` feet. ANOVA analysis was used for the variance of the difference between the NDp and the five kinds of clinical measurements, and the level of significance was set at а=.05. The results showed that all five clinical measurements demonstrated significant differences with navicular drop. In post-hoc, FPI and NNHt showed significant differences in all foot types. The five clinical measurements are suitable the classification of foot types through the NDp. Therefore, it could be possible to assess correct and objective foot posture by using FPI and NNHt.
Visual categorisation of the arch index
Linear Mode
