An investigation of structure, flexibility, and function variables that discriminate asymptomatic foot types

Sarah P. Shultz, Jinsup Song, Andrew P. Kraszewski, Jocelyn F. Hafer, Smita Rao, Sherry Backus, Rajshree Mootanah, Howard J. Hillstrom

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

It has been suggested that foot type considers not only foot structure (high, normal, low arch), but also function (overpronation, normal, oversupination) and flexibility (reduced, normal, excessive). Therefore, this study used canonical regression analyses to assess which variables of foot structure, function, and flexibility can accurately discriminate between clinical foot type classifications. The feet of 61 asymptomatic, healthy adults (18-77 years) were classified as cavus (N = 24), rectus (N = 54), or planus (N = 44) using standard clinical measures. Custom jigs assessed foot structure and flexibility. Foot function was assessed using an emed-x plantar pressure measuring device. Canonical regression analyses were applied separately to extract essential structure, flexibility, and function variables. A third canonical regression analysis was performed on the extracted variables to identify a combined model. The initial combined model included 30 extracted variables; however 5 terminal variables (malleolar valgus index, arch height index while sitting, first metatarsophalangeal joint laxity while standing, pressure-time integral and maximum contact area of medial arch) were able to correctly predict 80.7% of foot types. These remaining variables focused on specific foot characteristics (hindfoot alignment, arch height, midfoot mechanics, Windlass mechanism) that could be essential to discriminating foot type.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)203-210
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Applied Biomechanics
Volume33
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2017

Fingerprint

Foot
Regression Analysis
Metatarsophalangeal Joint
Joint Instability
Pressure
Mechanics
Equipment and Supplies

Keywords

  • Clinical biomechanics
  • Kinematics
  • Musculoskeletal

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Rehabilitation

Cite this

An investigation of structure, flexibility, and function variables that discriminate asymptomatic foot types. / Shultz, Sarah P.; Song, Jinsup; Kraszewski, Andrew P.; Hafer, Jocelyn F.; Rao, Smita; Backus, Sherry; Mootanah, Rajshree; Hillstrom, Howard J.

In: Journal of Applied Biomechanics, Vol. 33, No. 3, 01.06.2017, p. 203-210.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Shultz, SP, Song, J, Kraszewski, AP, Hafer, JF, Rao, S, Backus, S, Mootanah, R & Hillstrom, HJ 2017, 'An investigation of structure, flexibility, and function variables that discriminate asymptomatic foot types', Journal of Applied Biomechanics, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 203-210. https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.2016-0001
Shultz, Sarah P. ; Song, Jinsup ; Kraszewski, Andrew P. ; Hafer, Jocelyn F. ; Rao, Smita ; Backus, Sherry ; Mootanah, Rajshree ; Hillstrom, Howard J. / An investigation of structure, flexibility, and function variables that discriminate asymptomatic foot types. In: Journal of Applied Biomechanics. 2017 ; Vol. 33, No. 3. pp. 203-210.
@article{d592bb5daff44994a1358417eacea83b,
title = "An investigation of structure, flexibility, and function variables that discriminate asymptomatic foot types",
abstract = "It has been suggested that foot type considers not only foot structure (high, normal, low arch), but also function (overpronation, normal, oversupination) and flexibility (reduced, normal, excessive). Therefore, this study used canonical regression analyses to assess which variables of foot structure, function, and flexibility can accurately discriminate between clinical foot type classifications. The feet of 61 asymptomatic, healthy adults (18-77 years) were classified as cavus (N = 24), rectus (N = 54), or planus (N = 44) using standard clinical measures. Custom jigs assessed foot structure and flexibility. Foot function was assessed using an emed-x plantar pressure measuring device. Canonical regression analyses were applied separately to extract essential structure, flexibility, and function variables. A third canonical regression analysis was performed on the extracted variables to identify a combined model. The initial combined model included 30 extracted variables; however 5 terminal variables (malleolar valgus index, arch height index while sitting, first metatarsophalangeal joint laxity while standing, pressure-time integral and maximum contact area of medial arch) were able to correctly predict 80.7{\%} of foot types. These remaining variables focused on specific foot characteristics (hindfoot alignment, arch height, midfoot mechanics, Windlass mechanism) that could be essential to discriminating foot type.",
keywords = "Clinical biomechanics, Kinematics, Musculoskeletal",
author = "Shultz, {Sarah P.} and Jinsup Song and Kraszewski, {Andrew P.} and Hafer, {Jocelyn F.} and Smita Rao and Sherry Backus and Rajshree Mootanah and Hillstrom, {Howard J.}",
year = "2017",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1123/jab.2016-0001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "203--210",
journal = "Journal of Applied Biomechanics",
issn = "1065-8483",
publisher = "Human Kinetics Publishers Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - An investigation of structure, flexibility, and function variables that discriminate asymptomatic foot types

AU - Shultz, Sarah P.

AU - Song, Jinsup

AU - Kraszewski, Andrew P.

AU - Hafer, Jocelyn F.

AU - Rao, Smita

AU - Backus, Sherry

AU - Mootanah, Rajshree

AU - Hillstrom, Howard J.

PY - 2017/6/1

Y1 - 2017/6/1

N2 - It has been suggested that foot type considers not only foot structure (high, normal, low arch), but also function (overpronation, normal, oversupination) and flexibility (reduced, normal, excessive). Therefore, this study used canonical regression analyses to assess which variables of foot structure, function, and flexibility can accurately discriminate between clinical foot type classifications. The feet of 61 asymptomatic, healthy adults (18-77 years) were classified as cavus (N = 24), rectus (N = 54), or planus (N = 44) using standard clinical measures. Custom jigs assessed foot structure and flexibility. Foot function was assessed using an emed-x plantar pressure measuring device. Canonical regression analyses were applied separately to extract essential structure, flexibility, and function variables. A third canonical regression analysis was performed on the extracted variables to identify a combined model. The initial combined model included 30 extracted variables; however 5 terminal variables (malleolar valgus index, arch height index while sitting, first metatarsophalangeal joint laxity while standing, pressure-time integral and maximum contact area of medial arch) were able to correctly predict 80.7% of foot types. These remaining variables focused on specific foot characteristics (hindfoot alignment, arch height, midfoot mechanics, Windlass mechanism) that could be essential to discriminating foot type.

AB - It has been suggested that foot type considers not only foot structure (high, normal, low arch), but also function (overpronation, normal, oversupination) and flexibility (reduced, normal, excessive). Therefore, this study used canonical regression analyses to assess which variables of foot structure, function, and flexibility can accurately discriminate between clinical foot type classifications. The feet of 61 asymptomatic, healthy adults (18-77 years) were classified as cavus (N = 24), rectus (N = 54), or planus (N = 44) using standard clinical measures. Custom jigs assessed foot structure and flexibility. Foot function was assessed using an emed-x plantar pressure measuring device. Canonical regression analyses were applied separately to extract essential structure, flexibility, and function variables. A third canonical regression analysis was performed on the extracted variables to identify a combined model. The initial combined model included 30 extracted variables; however 5 terminal variables (malleolar valgus index, arch height index while sitting, first metatarsophalangeal joint laxity while standing, pressure-time integral and maximum contact area of medial arch) were able to correctly predict 80.7% of foot types. These remaining variables focused on specific foot characteristics (hindfoot alignment, arch height, midfoot mechanics, Windlass mechanism) that could be essential to discriminating foot type.

KW - Clinical biomechanics

KW - Kinematics

KW - Musculoskeletal

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85027019983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85027019983&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1123/jab.2016-0001

DO - 10.1123/jab.2016-0001

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 203

EP - 210

JO - Journal of Applied Biomechanics

JF - Journal of Applied Biomechanics

SN - 1065-8483

IS - 3

ER -