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.
Injury Reduction Effectiveness of Selecting Running Shoes Based on Plantar Shape.
Knapik JJ, Swedler DI, Grier TL, Hauret KG, Bullock SH, Williams KW, Darakjy SS, Lester ME, Tobler SK, Jones BH. J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Apr 20. [Epub ahead of print]
Quote:
Popular running magazines and running shoe companies suggest that imprints of the bottom of the feet (plantar shape) can be used as an indication of the height of the medial longitudinal foot arch and that this can be used to select individually appropriate types of running shoes. This study examined whether or not this selection technique influenced injury risk during United States Army Basic Combat Training (BCT). After foot examinations, BCT recruits in an experimental group (E: n = 1,079 men and 451 women) selected motion control, stability, or cushioned shoes for plantar shapes judged to represent low, medium, or high foot arches, respectively. A control group (C: n = 1,068 men and 464 women) received a stability shoe regardless of plantar shape. Injuries during BCT were determined from outpatient medical records. Other previously known injury risk factors (e.g., age, fitness, and smoking) were obtained from a questionnaire and existing databases. Multivariate Cox regression controlling for other injury risk factors showed little difference in injury risk between the E and C groups among men (risk ratio (E/C) = 1.01; 95% confidence interval = 0.88-1.16; p = 0.87) or women (risk ratio (E/C) = 1.07; 95% confidence interval = 0.91-1.25; p = 0.44). In practical application, this prospective study demonstrated that selecting shoes based on plantar shape had little influence on injury risk in BCT. Thus, if the goal is injury prevention, this selection technique is not necessary in BCT.
Re: Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
Hi DaVinci,
I'm with you on this one. Sadly I suspect the answer is 'never'. I was recently asked to write a piece for a new running trainer website, and when I submitted the first draft I was contacted within a few days to ask why I had omitted key points such as the 'wet foot test', which shoe was best for an 'overpronator' etc etc as these were required for the site.
I tried discussing/arguing the point with regard to newer terminology/research but the bottom line is that they simply want everything to be put in a nice neat box. Maybe its a political/financial thing or maybe they just don't like the uncertainty that we don't know all the answers to all the questions. I don't ever see it changing, but really hope I'm wrong on that one.
Re: Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
I think it is something that is very embedded, and running shoe makers have a lot behind it, if not financially then just by the training they've given to retailers. It takes a lot to turn round and say all that stuff we've been telling you is just wrong.
I spoke to retailer a year or so ago who proudly showed me a colour changing board that people would stand on to produce a footprint. This was branded with one of the major manufacturers.
Re: Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
never say never fellas! At least one major manufacturer is working on eradicating this embarrassing form of "analysis" as we speak. It has been a thorn in my side for a long time, and a major flaw in the desire to be able to match foot type to what presumably is a quite technical shoe.
Watch this space, and hopefully you will never have to read about the wet foot on the brown paper bag again.
Re: Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
First post so don't be too harsh!!! It is unfortunate that the wider population don't have the understanding that we do of the foot mechanics. Ask the local person on the street not even half of people could tell you what pronation is (or even if they have ever heard of it!!!). The wider population rely on the sales person to recommend the right shoe for them, I have been involved with a company that uses a board that reacts to the heat the foot produces to give a footprint. Knowing what i do, i found it amazing that people would buy shoes from a static assessment when the aim of a shoe is for dynamic use. This board was pushed by both the shoes company then by the distributer as an accurate way to fit people into the right shoe. But until the education reaches the masses it's easy money for the footwear companies!!! Great to see the efficacy of these foot type measures tested too!!!
Re: Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
Quote:
Ask the local person on the street not even half of people could tell you what pronation is (or even if they have ever heard of it!!!).
Hi Dean,
I tend to find the problem is just the opposite - most people have heard of it and think they can tell you what it is. The trouble is the information they have read or been given is absolute toilet. Its the myths surrounding pronation (its always pathological, 'overpronation/hyperpronation' etc etc) are the things I'd love the general public to see for what they are. Save me explaining it every 5 minutes...
Re: Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
Quote:
Originally Posted by toomoon
never say never fellas! At least one major manufacturer is working on eradicating this embarrassing form of "analysis" as we speak. It has been a thorn in my side for a long time, and a major flaw in the desire to be able to match foot type to what presumably is a quite technical shoe.
Watch this space, and hopefully you will never have to read about the wet foot on the brown paper bag again.
cheers
Simon
Bartold!!
About time you showed up to say something every now and then. Good to see you are still alive!
__________________
Sincerely,
Kevin
**************************************************
Kevin A. Kirby, DPM
Adjunct Associate Professor
Department of Applied Biomechanics
California School of Podiatric Medicine at Samuel Merritt College
Re: Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who thinks a wet footprint is useless in choosing a suitable running shoe. My question is; what should I be looking for? I'm a marathon runner and a podiatrist in a busy sports injury practice and spend a lot of time watching runners either on the ground or on a treadmill. I'd really like to know which criteria other podiatrists are using for choosing the correct shoe.
PURPOSE:: Popular running magazines and running shoe companies advise using the shape of the weight-bearing plantar surface of the foot as a basis for selecting a proper type of running shoe to reduce injury risk. The imprint is assumed to reflect the height of the medial longitudinal arch (MLA). This study examined the assumption that plantar surface morphology was a surrogate for height of the MLA.
METHODS:: Recruits (n=3,968) entering United States Army Basic Combat Training had their plantar foot surfaces assessed visually as low, normal or high by two raters who viewed imprints of the plantar foot surface. Actual arch height was measured with calipers as distance from the standing surface to the inferior medial border of the navicular tuberosity. Measured MLA heights were compared with plantar surface imprints to evaluate the effectiveness of visual inspection as a means of arch height classification.
RESULTS:: For the right foot, individuals with low, normal or high plantar shapes had a mean +/- standard deviation arch height of 33.5+/-6.8 mm, 40.4+/-7.2 mm, and 43.1+/-7.3 mm, respectively (ANOVA p<0.01); however, the individuals' measured MLA heights fell into the corresponding plantar shape percentiles (low, normal, high) only 65% of the time. Increased body mass index (BMI) decreased correct assessment of the MLA.
CONCLUSION:: Visual assessment of indicating progressively higher plantar shapes corresponded to progressively higher average differences in measured arch heights; nonetheless, there was considerable overlap among the three plantar shapes with 35% of plantar shapes being misclassified compared with measured arch height, especially among individuals with higher BMI.
Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
Re: Plantar foot shape, choice of running shoes and injury prevention
Linear Mode
