Stability of Three Different Sanitary Shoes on Healthcare Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background: The main purpose of this research was to determine the stability of three different sanitary shoes on nurses with eyes open and closed with respect to barefoot condition. In addition, the secondary aim was to determine the reliability of stability measurements under these different conditions. Methods: A crossover quasi-experimental study (NCT03764332) was performed. Twenty-six nurses who wore different sanitary shoes (Eva Plus Ultralight(®), Gym Step(®) and Milan-SCL Liso(®)) were evaluated with respect to barefoot condition for stability measures on the Podoprint(®) podobarometric and stabilometry tool and with eyes open and closed. Furthermore, the reliability of stability measurements was determined by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) under these different conditions. Results: Between-groups comparisons of the static and stabilometry podobarometric data with eyes open showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). Milan-SCL Liso(®) sanitary shoes improved podobarometric data of forefoot force and distribution with respect to barefoot condition. Eva Plus Ultralight(®) and Gym Step(®) sanitary shoes increased the stroke length mean, stroke surface mean, and anterior speed mean as well as reduced y axis displacement mean with respect to barefoot condition. Similar findings were determined for measurements with eyes closed. ICCs ranged from poor to excellent reliability (ICC = 0.010–0.995). Conclusions: Sanitary shoes improved podobarometric and stabilometry stability with respect to barefoot condition.