Foot Line Test for assessing foot posture

NewsBot · Dec 11, 2007

Members do not see these Ads. Sign Up.
Reliability and normative values of the foot line test: a technique to assess foot posture.
Brushøj C, Langberg H, Larsen K, Nielsen MB, Hölmich P.
Amager Hospital, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Copenhagen, Denmark.
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007 Nov;37(11):703-7.

STUDY DESIGN: Test-retest reliability. OBJECTIVE: To examine the reliability and report normative values of a novel test, the foot line test (FLT), to describe foot morphology.

BACKGROUND: Numerous foot examinations are performed each day, but most existing examination techniques have considerable limitations regarding reliability and validity.

METHODS: One hundred thirty subjects with mean foot size 44 (41-50 European size) participated. Two examiners, blinded to each other's measurements, measured the right foot of the subjects twice and the left foot once. The position of the most medial aspect of the navicular in the mediolateral direction was projected vertically onto a piece of paper placed under the subject's foot, and compared to the position of the forefoot and hindfoot to obtain the FLT value.

RESULTS: FLT values ranged from -8 to 14 mm, with a mean (+/-SD) of 3.7 +/- 3.4 mm. The intratester reproducibility reported by SEM was 0.8 mm for tester 1 and 0.9 mm for tester 2, while intertester SEM was 1.4 mm for the right foot and 1.3 mm for the left foot. The intrarater ICC was 0.95 for tester 1 and 0.94 for tester 2, while the interrater ICC was 0.86 (left foot) and 0.83 (right foot). There was no significant association between foot size and FLT values.

CONCLUSION: The FLT is a reproducible technique to assess foot posture.
Click to expand...

Admin2 · Dec 11, 2007

Related threads:
Foot Posture Index
Foot Posture Index
Foot Posture Index
Clinical Measures/ Indicators

Admin2 · Dec 11, 2007

Admin2 said: ↑

Foot Posture Index
Foot Posture Index
Foot Posture Index
Click to expand...

Even though they have the same title, they are 3 different threads!

NewsBot · Mar 10, 2009

Dynamic plantar pressure parameters associated with static arch height index during gait
Deydre S. Teyhen, Brian E. Stoltenberg, Keith M. Collinsworth, Crystal L. Giesel, Drew G. Williams, Cryus H. Kardouni, Joseph M. Molloy, Stephen L. Goffar, Douglas S. Christie and Thomas McPoil
Clinical Biomechanics. Article in Press

Background
Although extreme values of arch height have been associated with increased risk for overuse injury, knowledge is limited regarding the association between arch height and plantar pressure distributions during gait. The primary purpose of this study was to explore which plantar pressure measurements during gait were associated with static arch height and arch height index.

Methods
Static arch height, arch height index, and dynamic plantar pressure distributions were collected for 1000 subjects (566 males, 434 females, 30.6 [SD 8.0] years, 171.1 [SD 9.3] cm, 76.9 [SD 14.7] kg). A hierarchical regression analysis was performed to determine the most parsimonious set of plantar pressure parameters associated with arch height. The predicted values were used to calculate dynamic arch height index. Correlation and residual analysis were performed to assess the association between statically and dynamically determined arch height indices.

Findings
A 5-variable model (F = 296.6; P < 0.001) was able to describe the relationship between static arch height and the dynamic foot during gait (R = 0.77 [95% CI = 0.75–0.80]). The correlation between the static and dynamically determined arch height indices was r = 0.60 (95% CI = 0.53, 0.63), with a mean residual of 0.000 (SD 0.015).

Interpretation
A multivariate model generated by plantar parameters during gait was able to predict 60% of the variability in static arch height. This model consisted of variables that appear to be clinically plausible and inform the association between static arch height and dynamic foot posture. Future researchers should address the association between statically and dynamically determined AHI values with lower extremity overuse injuries.
Click to expand...

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

Admin2 Administrator Staff Member

NewsBot The Admin that posts the news.

Utilisation of the 2019 IWGDF diabetic foot infection guidelines to benchmark diabetic foot care

Quality of online information about children's footwear measurement

Perceptions about running footwear and assessment of an online educational module

New Guidelines for Foot Care in EB Stress Use of Podiatrists, Proper Footwear

Differences in diabetic foot guidelines

New Australian guidelines on footwear for people with diabetes

Reliability and readability of clubfoot online resources

Share This Page