RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The Root model of normal and abnormal foot function remains the basis for clinical foot orthotic practice globally. Our aim was to investigate the relationship between foot deformities and kinematic compensations that are the foundations of the model. METHODS: A convenience sample of 140 were screened and 100 symptom free participants aged 18-45 years were invited to participate. The static biomechanical assessment described by the Root model was used to identify five foot deformities. A 6 segment foot model was used to measure foot kinematics during gait. Statistical tests compared foot kinematics between feet with and without foot deformities and correlated the degree of deformity with any compensatory motions. RESULTS: None of the deformities proposed by the Root model were associated with distinct differences in foot kinematics during gait when compared to those without deformities or each other. Static and dynamic parameters were not correlated. CONCLUSIONS: Taken as part of a wider body of evidence, the results of this study have profound implications for clinical foot health practice. We believe that the assessment protocol advocated by the Root model is no longer a suitable basis for professional practice. We recommend that clinicians stop using sub-talar neutral position during clinical assessments and stop assessing the non-weight bearing range of ankle dorsiflexion, first ray position and forefoot alignments and movement as a means of defining the associated foot deformities. The results question the relevance of the Root assessments in the prescription of foot orthoses.
Assuntos
Deformidades do Pé/diagnóstico , Pé/fisiopatologia , Marcha/fisiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Fenômenos Biomecânicos , Simulação por Computador , Feminino , Deformidades do Pé/fisiopatologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Amplitude de Movimento Articular , Adulto JovemRESUMO
The ankle is often considered to have little or no capacity to move in the transverse plane. This is clear in the persistent concept that it is the role of the subtalar joint to accommodate the transverse plane motion of the leg while the foot remains in a fixed transverse plane position on the floor. We present data from noninvasive in vivo study of the ankle subtalar complex during standing internal and external rotation of the leg and study of the ankle subtalar complex during walking. These data reinforce the results of cadaver study and invasive in vivo study of the ankle/subtalar complex. We suggest that the ankle is capable of considerable movement in the transverse plane (generally greater than 15 degrees) and that its role in the mechanism that allows the foot to remain in a fixed transverse plane position on the floor while the leg rotates in the transverse plane, is not simply the transfer of the transverse plane moment to the subtalar joint, but is accommodation of some of the necessary movement.
Assuntos
Articulação do Tornozelo/fisiologia , Articulação Talocalcânea/fisiologia , Adulto , Fenômenos Biomecânicos , Feminino , Humanos , Perna (Membro)/fisiologia , Masculino , Movimento , Rotação , Caminhada/fisiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Understanding motion in the normal healthy foot is a prerequisite for understanding the effects of pathology and thereafter setting targets for interventions. Quality foot kinematic data from healthy feet will also assist the development of high quality and research based clinical models of foot biomechanics. To address gaps in the current literature we aimed to describe 3D foot kinematics using a 5 segment foot model in a population of 100 pain free individuals. METHODS: Kinematics of the leg, calcaneus, midfoot, medial and lateral forefoot and hallux were measured in 100 self reported healthy and pain free individuals during walking. Descriptive statistics were used to characterise foot movements. Contributions from different foot segments to the total motion in each plane were also derived to explore functional roles of different parts of the foot. RESULTS: Foot segments demonstrated greatest motion in the sagittal plane, but large ranges of movement in all planes. All foot segments demonstrated movement throughout gait, though least motion was observed between the midfoot and calcaneus. There was inconsistent evidence of movement coupling between joints. There were clear differences in motion data compared to foot segment models reported in the literature. CONCLUSIONS: The data reveal the foot is a multiarticular structure, movements are complex, show incomplete evidence of coupling, and vary person to person. The data provide a useful reference data set against which future experimental data can be compared and may provide the basis for conceptual models of foot function based on data rather than anecdotal observations.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on which protocols should be used to assess foot and lower limb biomechanics in clinical practice. The reliability of many assessments has been questioned by previous research. The aim of this investigation was to (i) identify (through consensus) what biomechanical examinations are used in clinical practice and (ii) evaluate the inter-assessor reliability of some of these examinations. METHODS: Part1: Using a modified Delphi technique 12 podiatrists derived consensus on the biomechanical examinations used in clinical practice. Part 2: Eleven podiatrists assessed 6 participants using a subset of the assessment protocol derived in Part 1. Examinations were compared between assessors. RESULTS: Clinicians choose to estimate rather than quantitatively measure foot position and motion. Poor inter-assessor reliability was recorded for all examinations. Intra-class correlation coefficient values (ICC) for relaxed calcaneal stance position were less than 0.23 and were less than 0.14 for neutral calcaneal stance position. For the examination of ankle joint dorsiflexion, ICC values suggest moderate reliability (less than 0.61). The results of a random effects ANOVA highlight that participant (up to 5.7°), assessor (up to 5.8°) and random (up to 5.7°) error all contribute to the total error (up to 9.5° for relaxed calcaneal stance position, up to 10.7° for the examination of ankle joint dorsiflexion). Kappa Fleiss values for categorisation of first ray position and mobility were less than 0.05 and for limb length assessment less than 0.02, indicating slight agreement. CONCLUSION: Static biomechanical assessment of the foot, leg and lower limb is an important protocol in clinical practice, but the key examinations used to make inferences about dynamic foot function and to determine orthotic prescription are unreliable.