Differences between growing up barefoot vs shod

NewsBot · Aug 18, 2017

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
Growing-up (habitually) barefoot influences the development of foot and arch morphology in children and adolescents.
Hollander K et al
Sci Rep. 2017 Aug 14;7(1):8079. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-07868-4.

The development of the human foot is crucial for motor learning in children and adolescents as it ensures the basic requirements for bipedal locomotion and stable standing. Although there is an ongoing debate of the advantages and disadvantages of early and permanent footwear use, the influence of regular barefootness on foot characteristics in different stages of child development has not been extensively evaluated. A multicenter epidemiological study was conducted to compare the foot morphology between habitually barefoot children and adolescents (N = 810) to age-, sex- and ethnicity-matched counterparts that are used to wearing shoes. While controlling for confounders, we found that habitual footwear use has significant effects on foot-related outcomes in all age groups, such as a reduction in foot arch and hallux angles. The results indicate an impact of habitual footwear use on the development of the feet of children and adolescents. Therefore, growing up barefoot or shod may play an important role for childhood foot development, implying long-term consequences for motor learning and health later in life.
Click to expand...

Admin2 · Aug 18, 2017

Related Threads:
Less foot injuries in rural Ethiopian school children wearing shoes
Prevalance of bunions in barefoot vs shod runners

Craig Payne · Aug 18, 2017

figure this one out ..
"The hallux valgus angle of habitually barefoot children in this study showed higher values in all age groups."
.... more hallux valgus in the barefoot groups ....

zsuzsanna · Aug 25, 2017

Craig Payne said: ↑

figure this one out ..
"The hallux valgus angle of habitually barefoot children in this study showed higher values in all age groups."
.... more hallux valgus in the barefoot groups ....
Click to expand...

The study claims a REDUCTION in the hallux angles in the habitual footwear users. Does that imply that the opposite is true? It is a very vague study.

NewsBot · Nov 12, 2017

Foot Structure and Function in Habitually Barefoot and Shod Adolescents in Kenya
Aibast, Herje et al
Current Sports Medicine Reports: November/December 2017 - Volume 16 - Issue 6 - p 448–458

Habitually barefoot (HB) children from the Kalenjin tribe of Kenya are known for their high physical activity levels. To date, there has been no comprehensive assessment of foot structure and function in these highly active and HB children/adolescents and link with overuse injuries. Purpose: The aim of this research is to assess foot structure, foot function, injury and physical activity levels in Kenyan children and adolescents who are HB compared with those who were habitually shod (HS). Methods: Foot structure, function, injury prevalence, and physical activity levels were studied using two studies with equal numbers of HS and HB. HS and HB children and adolescents were matched for age, sex, and body mass. Foot arch characteristics, foot strength, and lower-limb injury prevalence were investigated in Study 1 (n = 76). Heel bone stiffness, Achilles tendon moment arm length and physical activity levels in Study 2 (n=62). Foot muscle strength was measured using a strength device TKK 3360 and heel bone stiffness by bone ultrasonometry. The moment arm length of the Achilles tendon was estimated from photographs and physical activity was assessed using questionnaires and accelerometers. Results: Foot shortening strength was greater in HB (4.8 ± 1.9 kg vs 3.5 ± 1.8 kg, P < 0.01). Navicular drop was greater in HB (0.53 ± 0.32 cm vs 0.39 ± 0.19 cm, P < 0.05). Calcaneus stiffness index was greater (right 113.5 ± 17.1 vs 100.5 ± 116.8, P < 0.01 left 109.8 ± 15.7 vs 101.7 ± 18.7, P < 0.05) and Achilles tendon moment arm shorter in HB (right, 3.4 ± 0.4 vs 3.6 ± 0.4 cm, P < 0.05; left, 3.4 ± 0.5 vs 3.7 ± 0.4 cm, P < 0.01). Lower-limb injury prevalence was 8% in HB and 61% in HS. HB subjects spent more time engaged in moderate to vigorous physical activity (60 ± 26 min·d−1 vs 31 ± 13 min·d−1; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Significant differences observed in foot parameters, injury prevalence and general foot health between HB and HS suggest that footwear conditions may impact on foot structure and function and general foot health. HB children and adolescents spent more time engaged in moderate to vigorous physical activity and less time sedentary than HS children and adolescents.
Click to expand...

Admin2 · Nov 20, 2017

Foot Strike Patterns Differ Between Children and Adolescents Growing up Barefoot vs. Shod
Karsten Hollander et al
Int J Sports Med

Effects of early and permanent footwear use are not well understood. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of habituation to footwear on foot strike patterns of children and adolescents. Healthy habitually barefoot and shod participants (aged 6–18 years) from South Africa (n=288) and Germany (n=390) performed multiple 20-m jogging and running trials with and without shoes. Each foot strike was captured using a high-speed camera to determine a rearfoot or non-rearfoot strike. The probability of a rearfoot strike in both cohorts and each age was analyzed by using a mixed-effects logistic regression adjusted for possible confounders. Habitually barefoot children showed a higher probability of using rearfoot strikes than habitually shod children (p<0.001). The probability was age-dependent and decreased in habitually barefoot children with age (ORbarefoot-jogging=0.82, 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.96, p=0.014; ORbarefoot-running=0.58, 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.67, p<0.001 and ORshod-running=0.68, 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.79, p<0.001). In habitually shod children, the probability increased significantly for shod jogging (OR=1.19, 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.35, p=0.006). To conclude, foot strike patterns of children are influenced by habituation to footwear. Younger habitually barefoot children show higher rates of rearfoot strikes for shod and barefoot running, and it converges in later adolescence.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jun 6, 2018

Foot strike pattern in preschool children during running: sex and shod-unshod differences.
Latorre-Román PÁ et al
Eur J Sport Sci. 2018 Apr;18(3):407-414.

PURPOSE:
This study aims to determine the foot strike patterns (FSPs) and neutral support (no inversion [INV]/eversion [EVE] and no foot rotation) in preschool children, as well as to determine the influence of shod/unshod conditions and sex.

METHODS:
A total of 1356 children aged 3-6 years (673 boys and 683 girls) participated in this study. A sagittal and frontal-plane video (240 Hz) was recorded using a high-speed camcorder to record the following variables: rearfoot strike (RFS), midfoot strike (MFS), forefoot strike (FFS), inversion/ eversion (INV/EVE) and foot rotation on initial contact.

RESULTS:
There were no between-sex significant differences in both shod and unshod conditions in RFS. In the unshod condition, there was a significant reduction (p < 0.001) of RFS prevalence in both boys (shod condition = 44.2% vs. 34.7% unshod condition) and girls (shod condition = 48.5% vs. 36.1% unshod condition). As for neutral support, there were no between-sex differences in both shod and unshod conditions or in the shod-unshod comparison.

CONCLUSION:
In preschool children, no between-sex differences were found in relation to prevalence of RFS and neutral support (no INV/EVE). Shod running alters FSP of running barefoot, producing a significant increase of RFS prevalence.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Aug 8, 2018

Cross-Sectional Study Shows Kindergarten Barefoot Policy Positively Affects Soles’ Contact Area
Shigeki Matsuda, Kosho Kasuga, Tadayuki Hanai, Tomohiro Demura
APE> Vol.8 No.3, August 2018

Although some studies have examined the effect of allowing preschool children to go without shoes, some points remain unexamined. Therefore, this study examined the effect of kindergartens’ barefoot policy on the contact area of the soles of the feet (plantar arch, hallux valgus angle, and foot angle). Participants were 313 preschool children (169 boys; 144 girls) at a kindergarten following the barefoot policy and 339 (176 boys; 163 girls) at a kindergarten not following the policy. The children stood barefoot on a pedoscope, so images of their soles’ contact area could be taken and then analyzed by software specifically for that purpose. Both boys and girls who attended kindergartens with barefoot policy had better development of the plantar arch and less angle of the hallux valgus than children who attended kindergartens not following the barefoot policy. Only boys who attended kindergartens that followed barefoot policy had a larger foot angle than children who attended kindergartens that did not. For preschool children, barefoot policy positively affected their soles’ contact area.
Click to expand...

scotfoot · Aug 8, 2018

From the paper cited above -
"Thus, barefoot children’s plantar arch likely develops better because their windlass mechanism works more frequently."

My Understanding is that Salford University are very involved with this subject . Could I suggest that the initial windlass phase is more impeded by footwear than the second windlass phase ( that engaged in later stance ) and that this might be worth considering in footwear design for children .

Dieter Fellner · Aug 8, 2018

And yet this no evidence such a foot is 'healthier' now or in the future.... pseudoscience

scotfoot · Aug 9, 2018

Hi Dieter ,
I am not sure what you mean by " such a foot " . Could you elaborate ?
Gerry

NewsBot · Aug 12, 2018

Analysis of foot strike pattern, rearfoot dynamic and foot rotation over childhood. A cross-sectional study.
Latorre Román PÁ et al
J Sports Sci. 2018 Aug 10:1-7.

The purpose of this study was to determine the foot strike patterns (FSP), rearfoot position at initial contact (RPic, i.e., No INV/EVE) and foot rotation in children in relation to age. A total of 932 children aged 3 to 16 years participated in this study. A sagittal and frontal-plane video was recorded using a high-speed camcorder to analyse these variables. There is a significant increase (p < 0.001) of rearfoot strike patterns (RFS) prevalence in relation to age; e.g. preschool children (3-6 years old) displayed an RFS prevalence 46.65% and the adolescent population(15-16 years old) an RFS prevalence 92.20%. The total RFS prevalence in all samples was 69.25%. There was a significant reduction (p < 0.001) of prevalence of RPic in relation to age groups; preschool children displayed a prevalence of RPic 60.37% and the adolescent population 10%. There was a significant reduction (p < 0.001) of prevalence of no foot rotation in relation to age groups; preschool children displayed a prevalence of no foot rotation 48.95% and the adolescent population 13.55%. In conclusion, FSP in children are influenced by age. It is noteworthy that the RFS prevalence of children is lower in comparison to the adult population.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Jun 28, 2022

Measurement of the Developing Foot in Shod and Barefoot Paediatric Populations: A Narrative Review
Maisie Squibb et al
Children 2022, 9(5), 750; https://doi.org/10.3390/children9050750

The theory that footwear may change foot shape dates back 100 years. Since this period, research has revealed the anatomical and functional consequences that footwear can cause to the foot. Children’s feet remain malleable as they undergo developmental changes until adolescence, which is why childhood is arguably a crucial period to understand how footwear can affect natural foot development. This review explored the development of the foot in children and adolescents and the methods used to measure the different foot structures; it comments on the key issues with some of these methods and gives direction for future research. Various internal and external factors can affect foot development; the main factors are age, gender, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI) and footwear habits. Research on how footwear can affect foot development has increased over the years and the final section of this review aimed to unpick the findings. Studies investigating the influence of footwear habits on foot length and width have established inconsistent findings. Many of the studies in the review did not control for internal and external factors that can affect foot development. There was also a limited number of studies that investigated hallux valgus angle and muscle strength differences in those with different footwear habits. Moreover, multiple studies in the final section of this review did not successfully examine the footwear habits of the participants and instead used observations or self-assessments, which is a major limitation. Future research should examine footwear behaviors and other confounding factors when investigating the development of the foot in children and adolescents. Moreover, researchers should critically evaluate the methods used to quantify the different structures of the foot to ensure valid and reliable parameters are being used.
Click to expand...

NewsBot · Nov 1, 2022

Comparison of Foot Arch in Shod and Unshod Individuals in East Gojjam, Ethiopia: A Cross-Sectional Study
Belta Asnakew Abegaz et al
J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2022 Oct 20;1-33

Background: The human foot has three arches. The medial longitudinal arch is the longest, the highest, and the most important. The development of a normal foot arch is greatly affected by genetic inheritance, differences in the environment, socioeconomic development, body weight, sex, ethnicity, and culture. The purpose of this study was to compare the arch type between shoe-wearing and barefooted individuals.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted. The data obtained were checked for clarity and consistency before analysis. The analysis was done using descriptive statistics and chi-square. p-values less than 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant.

Result: From a total of 446 subjects, 217 (48.7%) were males, 131 (29.6%) were urban residents and 226 (50.6 %) were shoe wearers. From the total sample, 46.2%, 42.8%, and 11% are high, normal, and flat-arched individuals, respectively. Of the shoe wearers, 6.7% have a flat arch while 4.3% of the barefooted subjects are flat-arched. Of the total flat-arched subjects, 8.3% are males and 2.7% are females. Of the urban residents, 17.5% have a flat foot and 8.3% of rural residents were flat arched. Among the shoe wearers, 8.8% use closed-toe shoes, and 4.4% that wear sandals are flat-arched.

Conclusion: The result indicates sex, type of shoes, wearing shoes, and being barefooted affected the development of the foot arch.
Click to expand...

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

Craig Payne Moderator

zsuzsanna Active Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

scotfoot Well-Known Member

Dieter Fellner Well-Known Member

scotfoot Well-Known Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Performance Differences Between the Sexes in the Boston Marathon

Kinematic differences between neutral and flat feet with and without symptoms

Foot Posture differences between swimmers and footballers

Differences in plantar tissue stress between healing and non-healing plantar neuropathic ulcers

Differences in the mechanical characteristics of plantar soft tissue between ulcerated and non-ulcer

Functional differences between the hallux and lesser toes during the single leg stance

Differences between podiatry in Spain and France

Share This Page