Cargando…
Reliability and validity of Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain
Previous studies have demonstrated that Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) is a valid and moderately reliable tool to evaluate foot posture. However, data about reliability and validity of FPI-6 in the assessment of foot posture in people with low back pain (LBP) is lacking. To investigate reliability and v...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9729570/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36477012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-22220-1 |
_version_ | 1784845497835454464 |
---|---|
author | Yang, Jiaman Ou, Zhiwen Mao, Zhitao Wang, Yi Zhong, Yiheng Dong, Wei Shen, Zhen Chen, Zehua |
author_facet | Yang, Jiaman Ou, Zhiwen Mao, Zhitao Wang, Yi Zhong, Yiheng Dong, Wei Shen, Zhen Chen, Zehua |
author_sort | Yang, Jiaman |
collection | PubMed |
description | Previous studies have demonstrated that Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) is a valid and moderately reliable tool to evaluate foot posture. However, data about reliability and validity of FPI-6 in the assessment of foot posture in people with low back pain (LBP) is lacking. To investigate reliability and validity of FPI-6 in the assessment of foot posture in people with LBP. Thirty volunteers with LBP, aged 20–64 years, were recruited for the research and assessed by two raters. The data measured by different raters on the same day were used to calculate the inter-rater reliability. The data measured by the same rater on different dates were used to calculate the test–retest reliability. The reliability of FPI-6 was tested with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and absolute reliability with standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC) and Bland–Altman analysis. The validity of FPI-6 was tested with Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Spearman's correlation coefficients. The FPI-6 indicated excellent inter-rater and test–retest reliability in the evaluation of foot posture in people with LBP (ICC = 0.97 and 0.95). The agreement for inter-rater and test–retest was excellent based on the SEM (SEM = 0.12) and MDC value (MDC = 0.33). Bland–Altman plots showed that there was no significant systematic bias for the agreement on the ground of low mean difference (< 1). The EFA suggested that the fit indices were considered acceptable according to the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) value (KMO = 0.620) and Bartlett's sphericity test (P < 0.01). There was a statistically significant positive correlation between each item and total score of FPI-6 because the Spearman’s correlation coefficient of six items were all > 0.3 (P < 0.01). The inter-rater and test–retest reliability and validity of FPI-6 on people with LBP were proved reliable. It might be considered a reliable and valid adjunctive tool to detect possible changes of foot posture after interventions in patients with LBP. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9729570 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-97295702022-12-09 Reliability and validity of Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain Yang, Jiaman Ou, Zhiwen Mao, Zhitao Wang, Yi Zhong, Yiheng Dong, Wei Shen, Zhen Chen, Zehua Sci Rep Article Previous studies have demonstrated that Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) is a valid and moderately reliable tool to evaluate foot posture. However, data about reliability and validity of FPI-6 in the assessment of foot posture in people with low back pain (LBP) is lacking. To investigate reliability and validity of FPI-6 in the assessment of foot posture in people with LBP. Thirty volunteers with LBP, aged 20–64 years, were recruited for the research and assessed by two raters. The data measured by different raters on the same day were used to calculate the inter-rater reliability. The data measured by the same rater on different dates were used to calculate the test–retest reliability. The reliability of FPI-6 was tested with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and absolute reliability with standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC) and Bland–Altman analysis. The validity of FPI-6 was tested with Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Spearman's correlation coefficients. The FPI-6 indicated excellent inter-rater and test–retest reliability in the evaluation of foot posture in people with LBP (ICC = 0.97 and 0.95). The agreement for inter-rater and test–retest was excellent based on the SEM (SEM = 0.12) and MDC value (MDC = 0.33). Bland–Altman plots showed that there was no significant systematic bias for the agreement on the ground of low mean difference (< 1). The EFA suggested that the fit indices were considered acceptable according to the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) value (KMO = 0.620) and Bartlett's sphericity test (P < 0.01). There was a statistically significant positive correlation between each item and total score of FPI-6 because the Spearman’s correlation coefficient of six items were all > 0.3 (P < 0.01). The inter-rater and test–retest reliability and validity of FPI-6 on people with LBP were proved reliable. It might be considered a reliable and valid adjunctive tool to detect possible changes of foot posture after interventions in patients with LBP. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-12-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9729570/ /pubmed/36477012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-22220-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Yang, Jiaman Ou, Zhiwen Mao, Zhitao Wang, Yi Zhong, Yiheng Dong, Wei Shen, Zhen Chen, Zehua Reliability and validity of Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain |
title | Reliability and validity of Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain |
title_full | Reliability and validity of Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain |
title_fullStr | Reliability and validity of Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain |
title_full_unstemmed | Reliability and validity of Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain |
title_short | Reliability and validity of Foot Posture Index (FPI-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain |
title_sort | reliability and validity of foot posture index (fpi-6) for evaluating foot posture in participants with low back pain |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9729570/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36477012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-22220-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yangjiaman reliabilityandvalidityoffootpostureindexfpi6forevaluatingfootpostureinparticipantswithlowbackpain AT ouzhiwen reliabilityandvalidityoffootpostureindexfpi6forevaluatingfootpostureinparticipantswithlowbackpain AT maozhitao reliabilityandvalidityoffootpostureindexfpi6forevaluatingfootpostureinparticipantswithlowbackpain AT wangyi reliabilityandvalidityoffootpostureindexfpi6forevaluatingfootpostureinparticipantswithlowbackpain AT zhongyiheng reliabilityandvalidityoffootpostureindexfpi6forevaluatingfootpostureinparticipantswithlowbackpain AT dongwei reliabilityandvalidityoffootpostureindexfpi6forevaluatingfootpostureinparticipantswithlowbackpain AT shenzhen reliabilityandvalidityoffootpostureindexfpi6forevaluatingfootpostureinparticipantswithlowbackpain AT chenzehua reliabilityandvalidityoffootpostureindexfpi6forevaluatingfootpostureinparticipantswithlowbackpain |