Multi-segment foot kinematics during gait in children with spastic cerebral palsy.

BACKGROUND: Foot deformities (e.g. planovalgus and cavovarus) are very common in children with spastic cerebral palsy (CP), with the midfoot often being involved. Dynamic foot function can be assessed with 3D gait analysis including a multi-segment foot model. Incorporating a midfoot segment in such a model, allows quantification of separate Chopart and Lisfranc joint kinematics. Yet, midfoot kinematics have not previously been reported in CP. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: What is the difference in multi-segment kinematics including midfoot joints between common foot deformities in CP and typically-developing feet? METHODS: 103 feet of 57 children with spastic CP and related conditions were retrospectively included and compared with 15 typically-developing children. All children underwent clinical gait analysis with the Amsterdam Foot Model marker set. Multi-segment foot kinematics were calculated for three strides per foot and averaged. A k-means cluster analysis was performed to identify foot deformity groups that were present within CP data. The deformity type represented by each cluster was based on the foot posture index. Kinematic output of the clusters was compared to typically-developing data for a static standing trial and for the range of motion and kinematic waveforms during walking, using regular and SPM independent t-tests respectively. RESULTS: A neutral, planovalgus and varus cluster were identified. Neutral feet showed mostly similar kinematics as typically-developing data. Planovalgus feet showed increased ankle valgus and Chopart dorsiflexion, eversion and abduction. Varus feet showed increased ankle varus and Chopart inversion and adduction. SIGNIFICANCE: This study is the first to describe Chopart and Lisfranc joint kinematics in different foot deformities of children with CP. It shows that adding a midfoot segment can provide additional clinical and kinematic information. It highlights joint angles that are more distinctive between deformities, which could be helpful to optimize the use of multi-segment foot kinematics in the clinical decision making process.

The Amsterdam Foot Model: a clinically informed multi-segment foot model developed to minimize measurement errors in foot kinematics.

BACKGROUND: Foot and ankle joint kinematics are measured during clinical gait analyses with marker-based multi-segment foot models. To improve on existing models, measurement errors due to soft tissue artifacts (STAs) and marker misplacements should be reduced. Therefore, the aim of this study is to define a clinically informed, universally applicable multi-segment foot model, which is developed to minimize these measurement errors. METHODS: The Amsterdam foot model (AFM) is a follow-up of existing multi-segment foot models. It was developed by consulting a clinical expert panel and optimizing marker locations and segment definitions to minimize measurement errors. Evaluation of the model was performed in three steps. First, kinematic errors due to STAs were evaluated and compared to two frequently used foot models, i.e. the Oxford and Rizzoli foot models (OFM, RFM). Previously collected computed tomography data was used of 15 asymptomatic feet with markers attached, to determine the joint angles with and without STAs taken into account. Second, the sensitivity to marker misplacements was determined for AFM and compared to OFM and RFM using static standing trials of 19 asymptomatic subjects in which each marker was virtually replaced in multiple directions. Third, a preliminary inter- and intra-tester repeatability analysis was performed by acquiring 3D gait analysis data of 15 healthy subjects, who were equipped by two testers for two sessions. Repeatability of all kinematic parameters was assessed through analysis of the standard deviation (σ) and standard error of measurement (SEM). RESULTS: The AFM was defined and all calculation methods were provided. Errors in joint angles due to STAs were in general similar or smaller in AFM (≤2.9°) compared to OFM (≤4.0°) and RFM (≤6.7°). AFM was also more robust to marker misplacement than OFM and RFM, as a large sensitivity of kinematic parameters to marker misplacement (i.e. > 1.0°/mm) was found only two times for AFM as opposed to six times for OFM and five times for RFM. The average intra-tester repeatability of AFM angles was σ:2.2[0.9°], SEM:3.3 ± 0.9° and the inter-tester repeatability was σ:3.1[2.1°], SEM:5.2 ± 2.3°. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement errors of AFM are smaller compared to two widely-used multi-segment foot models. This qualifies AFM as a follow-up to existing foot models, which should be evaluated further in a range of clinical application areas.

Intraobserver Reliability and Construct Validity of the Squat Test in Children With Cerebral Palsy.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated intraobserver reliability and construct validity of the squat test to assess lower extremity strength in children with cerebral palsy (CP) and spastic diplegia. METHODS: Children with CP performed 2 trials of the squat test and calculated the intraclass correlation coefficient to evaluate intraobserver reliability. Correlations between outcomes of hand-held dynamometry (HHD) of knee extensor strength and an 8-repetition maximum (8RM) leg press test and the squat test were calculated to evaluate construct validity. RESULTS: Excellent intraobserver reliability was observed for the squat test. Correlations between squat test performance and HHD knee extension and 8RM leg press test demonstrated good construct validity. CONCLUSIONS: The squat test is a reliable and valid tool to assess lower extremity strength in children with CP and spastic diplegia. The squat test is inexpensive and less time-consuming, and therefore particularly suitable for clinicians.