Correlation between static and dynamic foot arch measurement in children – Preliminary study of the Barefoot LIFE project. Karsten Hollander¹*,Timo Scholz¹, Klaus-Michael Braumann¹ & Astrid Zech² ¹University of Hamburg, Germany, Department of Sports and Exercise Medicine ² Friedrich Schiller University Jena, Germany, Department of Sport Science
RESEARCH QUESTION
INTRODUCTION
• The measurement of the medial longitudinal arch in children is a • What is correlation of static and dynamic foot arch in healthy and controversial topic [1] physically active children ? • For field studies, there is a need for an accurate and feasible measurement in the absence of radiographic assessments • The “Barefoot Locomotion for Individual Foot- and health Enhancement (Barefoot LIFE)” project aims to measure children’s foot arches statically and dynamically [2]
METHODS Dynamic arch measurements: • A pedobarographic platform (Emed-n50, Novel GmbH, Munich, Germany) was used to acquire the plantar pressure distribution • This was used to calculate the dynamic arch index according to Cavanagh et al [3]:
Figure 1 Exemplary footprint of one participant measured with the Emed-n50-platform
Static arch measurements: • A specially constructed platform was used to measure heel-to-toe length and dorsum height in a sitting and standing position [4]:
Statistical analysis: • Pearson correlation coefficient using SPSS (Version 23, IBM, Armonk, NY, USA) Figure 2 Specially constructed foot measurement platform
Results • Participants: 84 healthy children (n♀=34, mean ± SD age 9.39 ± 1.84 years, bmi 17.0 ± 2.5 kg/m2) • Descriptive statistics: Dynamic arch index 0.170 ± 0.063, static arch height index 0.274 ± 0.019 (sitting) and 0.242 ± 0.016 (standing) • Pearson correlation coefficient: Very low correlation between dynamic and static arch indices: a)
r=0.189
c)
b) r=0.256
r=0.712
Figure 3 Scatter plots displaying the correlation betweeen a) dynamic arch index (Emed-n50) and static arch height index in a sitting position b) dynamic arch index (Emed-n50) and static arch index in a standing position c) static arch height index in a standing and in a sitting position.
DISCUSSION • In contrast to the good correlation of dynamic and static arch measurements in adults (r = 0.60) [4], the correlation of both indices is very low in preadolescent children • Possible explanation: 1) not completed development of the pediatric foot [5] 2) differences in the measurement approach (direct vs. indirect) • Conclusion: Results of dynamic and static measurements should be interpreted seperatly and interpolations avoided REFERENCES [1] Williams DS & McClay IS. Physical therapy. 2000; 80(9):864-871. [2] Hollander, K., et al. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2016; 9(1). [3] Cavanagh PR & Rodgers MM: Journal of biomechanics 1987; 20(5):547-551 [4] Teyhen DS, et al. Clinical biomechanics. 2009; 24(4):391-396. [5] Muller S et al. Gait Posture. 2012; 35(3):389-394.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT Thanks to Simon Doyle, B.Sc. and Dieko Riebe, B.Sc. for their help with data collection and to Dr Axel Kalpen (Novel GmbH) for technical support. -------------------Corresponding author. E-mail address:
[email protected] (Dr. K. Hollander)
