Cargando…

Clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the level of agreement between common clinical foot classification measures. METHODS: Static foot assessment was undertaken using the Foot Posture Index (FPI-6), rearfoot angle (RFA), medial longitudinal arch angle (MLAA) and navicular drop (ND) in...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Langley, Ben, Cramp, Mary, Morrison, Stewart C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5131537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27980683
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13047-016-0180-3
_version_ 1782470915780509696
author Langley, Ben
Cramp, Mary
Morrison, Stewart C.
author_facet Langley, Ben
Cramp, Mary
Morrison, Stewart C.
author_sort Langley, Ben
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the level of agreement between common clinical foot classification measures. METHODS: Static foot assessment was undertaken using the Foot Posture Index (FPI-6), rearfoot angle (RFA), medial longitudinal arch angle (MLAA) and navicular drop (ND) in 30 participants (29 ± 6 years, 1.72 ± 0.08 m, 75 ± 18 kg). The right foot was measured on two occasions by one rater within the same test environment. Agreement between the test sessions was initially determined for each measure using the Weighted Kappa. Agreement between the measures was determined using Fleiss Kappa. RESULTS: Foot classification across the two test occasions was almost perfect for MLAA (Kw = .92) and FPI-6 (Kw = .92), moderate for RFA (Kw = .60) and fair for ND (Kw = .40) for comparison within the measures. Overall agreement between the measures for foot classification was moderate (Kf = .58). CONCLUSION: The findings reported in this study highlight discrepancies between the chosen foot classification measures. The FPI-6 was a reliable multi-planar measure whereas navicular drop emerged as an unreliable measure with only fair agreement across test sessions. The use of this measure for foot assessment is discouraged. The lack of strong consensus between measures for foot classification underpins the need for a consensus on appropriate clinical measures of foot structure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5131537
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51315372016-12-15 Clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree Langley, Ben Cramp, Mary Morrison, Stewart C. J Foot Ankle Res Research BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine the level of agreement between common clinical foot classification measures. METHODS: Static foot assessment was undertaken using the Foot Posture Index (FPI-6), rearfoot angle (RFA), medial longitudinal arch angle (MLAA) and navicular drop (ND) in 30 participants (29 ± 6 years, 1.72 ± 0.08 m, 75 ± 18 kg). The right foot was measured on two occasions by one rater within the same test environment. Agreement between the test sessions was initially determined for each measure using the Weighted Kappa. Agreement between the measures was determined using Fleiss Kappa. RESULTS: Foot classification across the two test occasions was almost perfect for MLAA (Kw = .92) and FPI-6 (Kw = .92), moderate for RFA (Kw = .60) and fair for ND (Kw = .40) for comparison within the measures. Overall agreement between the measures for foot classification was moderate (Kf = .58). CONCLUSION: The findings reported in this study highlight discrepancies between the chosen foot classification measures. The FPI-6 was a reliable multi-planar measure whereas navicular drop emerged as an unreliable measure with only fair agreement across test sessions. The use of this measure for foot assessment is discouraged. The lack of strong consensus between measures for foot classification underpins the need for a consensus on appropriate clinical measures of foot structure. BioMed Central 2016-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5131537/ /pubmed/27980683 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13047-016-0180-3 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Langley, Ben
Cramp, Mary
Morrison, Stewart C.
Clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree
title Clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree
title_full Clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree
title_fullStr Clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree
title_full_unstemmed Clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree
title_short Clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree
title_sort clinical measures of static foot posture do not agree
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5131537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27980683
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13047-016-0180-3
work_keys_str_mv AT langleyben clinicalmeasuresofstaticfootposturedonotagree
AT crampmary clinicalmeasuresofstaticfootposturedonotagree
AT morrisonstewartc clinicalmeasuresofstaticfootposturedonotagree