Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

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, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Everything that you are ever going to want to know about running shoes: Running Shoes Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Have you considered the Critical Thinking and Skeptical Boot Camp, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Bone morphology in different foot types

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by NewsBot, Apr 12, 2014.

  1. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1

    Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
    Talonavicular joint coverage and bone morphology between different foot types.
    Louie PK, Sangeorzan BJ, Fassbind MJ, Ledoux WR.
    J Orthop Res. 2014 Apr 9.
     
  2. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    At first glance looks like a nice addition to the existing research which highlights between subject variation in structural anatomy/morphology (and ultimately function). Would have been just as interesting as a piece looking at n=total and discussing variance in my opinion. Not sure what "typing" the feet brings to the party, but then I havent read full text yet. Anyone know how they "typed" the feet?
     
  3. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    Just pulled full text and had a cursory glance. Interesting methodology. Used an unvalidated typing procedure (see attached screenshot) and out of a sample of 40 people there was exactly n=10; in each category....hmmm... could happen I suppose. Why only use 65 individual feet though? Anyone better at research than me care to comment?
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    Ian, their words are so vague, their data is lacking in landmarks. Typically, all interlandmark distances need to be defined around pre-defined body plane positions. History abounds with these - eg Lisowski Albrecht & Oxnard 1974, or many since. Look at the works of this, or of Kidd et al since then, you will find references to body planes of various interlandmark distances of the talus, navicular, calcaneus and cuboid. Reference to foot types has always got the problem of cause of, or caused by. With post mortem specimens, one is presented with a morphology; how it got there is a mystery to many, including to me. (I wrote this before your last post - have not read it yet)
     
  5. Griff

    Griff Moderator

    Thanks Rob. I'm just looking deeper into individual variation for some work I'm doing and actually the foot "type" is not important to me at all - more the emphasis on how much we all potentially differ. Thanks for pointing me in the direction of the early/key work. I may come back to you if I'm struggling to locate it!
     
  6. See also: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/18797028/ but Rob's point re: plastic adaptation is well made.
     
  7. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    I was cut off half way - if you get two version of this, please forgive me. You need to get down to the NHM in South Kensington to look at the Spitalfields collection, and the Poundbury collection. The former is Georgian-Victorian UK, the latter in Romano British. You also need to get down to Kent to Birchington on sea - the Powell Cotton Museum. There you will find the greatest African primate collection in the world - 500 each of chimps and gorillas + all the rest.

    The bottom line is, that the more you get into hominid evolution, the more it grabs you - have fun!
     
  8. Bruce Williams

    Bruce Williams Well-Known Member

  9. Bruce Williams

    Bruce Williams Well-Known Member

  10. Rob Kidd

    Rob Kidd Well-Known Member

    Jan Bruckner and I overlapped as PhD students - she was well into her work when I started in the late 80's. I seem to remember we both presented at the 1994 AAPA conference in Denver
     
  11. NewsBot

    NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

    Articles:
    1
    Investigation of the role of calcaneal dimensions in pes cavus and pes planus
    Kylen Van Osch, Marjorie Johnson, Megan Balsdon, Colin Dombroski and Thomas Jenkyn
    The FASEB Journal vol. 28 no. 1 Supplement 920.4 April 2014
     
Loading...

Share This Page