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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |