Medial Longitudinal Arch: Accuracy, Reliability, and Correlation Between Navicular Drop Test and Footprint Parameters.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the correlation among the navicular drop test, the arch angle, the Staheli index and the Chippaux-Smirak index. The reliability and the correlation among the footprint parameters were also estimated. METHODS: A cross-sectional study (n = 86; 59.3% women; 27.8 years, standard deviation: 4.8 years) was carried out. The navicular drop test was evaluated and footprint parameters using a plantar pressure platform were recorded in the dominant foot. Pearson correlation coefficients, intraclass correlation coefficient, standard error of measurement, and minimum detectable change were calculated. RESULTS: Both intrarater and interrater reliability were excellent for all the parameters evaluated (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.880). Statistically significant correlations existed between the navicular drop test and footprints parameters (arch angle = 0,643; Staheli index = 0.633; Chippaux-Smirak index = 0.614). The footprint parameters had excellent correlation with each other (0.838-0.881). The navicular drop test and the footprint parameters studied were reproducible and thus had excellent reliability. CONCLUSION: The correlations obtained between the navicular drop test and the footprint parameters evaluated were good. The navicular drop test appears to be a reproducible, valid, and simple test for evaluating medial longitudinal arch height, having fewer disadvantages than using footprint parameters.

Reliability and Accuracy of Static Parameters Obtained From Ink and Pressure Platform Footprints.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and the intrarater reliability of arch angle (AA), Staheli Index (SI), and Chippaux-Smirak Index (CSI) obtained from ink and pressure platform footprints. METHODS: We obtained AA, SI, and CSI measurements from ink pedigraph footprints and pressure platform footprints in 40 healthy participants (aged 25.65 ± 5.187 years). Intrarater reliability was calculated for all parameters obtained using the 2 methods. Standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change were also calculated. A repeated-measure analysis of variance was used to identify differences between ink and pressure platform footprints. Intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland and Altman plots were used to assess similar parameters obtained using different methods. RESULTS: Intrarater reliability was >0.9 for all parameters and was slightly higher for the ink footprints. No statistical difference was reported in repeated-measure analysis of variance for any of the parameters. Intraclass correlation coefficient values from AA, SI, and CSI that were obtained using ink footprints and pressure platform footprints were excellent, ranging from 0.797 to 0.829. However, pressure platform overestimated AA and underestimated SI and CSI. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed that AA, SI, and CSI were similar regardless of whether the ink or pressure platform method was used. In addition, the parameters indicated high intrarater reliability and were reproducible.