Volume 7 Supplement 1

4th Congress of the International Foot and Ankle Biomechanics Community

Open Access

The effect of foot structure and functional foot stability on the gait patterns of the foot

Journal of Foot and Ankle Research20147(Suppl 1):A36

DOI: 10.1186/1757-1146-7-S1-A36

Published: 8 April 2014

Background

Poor foot structure, such as flat feet or high arched feet were thought to cause excessive foot movement during gait, which in turn is the pre-cursor to foot injuries [1, 3].

However, some studies claimed that the differences in gait patterns may not be due to foot structure alone [4, 8, 11]. It has been suggested that good foot functional stability can ‘protect’ the mal-aligned foot from injuries [9].

Functional Foot Stability is defined in this study as ‘the ability of the foot to continually adjust its position to maintain the body in an upright, balanced position’. An individual with good functional foot stability will be able to sense the foot position and if necessary, correct the position of the foot, thus preventing potential foot injuries.

Whilst studies have been also done to relate foot structure and functional stability [6], as well as functional stability and gait patterns [12, 14], no study has been done to investigate the combined effect of foot structure and functional foot stability on gait patterns. Therefore, this study examines the combined effect of foot structure and functional foot stability on running gait patterns.

Method

Sixty-five subjects (mean age 31 years SD 7.1) had their foot structure scored according to the Foot Posture Index (FPI) [5, 10, 13] and their functional foot stability was assessed with balance errors scored according to the criteria set out by the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS) [2, 7]. Subjects were then put into six groups- Flat foot Stable, Flat foot Unstable, Normal Stable, Normal Unstable, High Arched Stable and High Arch Unstable. The total excursion of the rearfoot, midfoot and first metatarso-phlangeal joints were noted with three dimensional motion analysis. The results were then analysed using ANOVA.

Results and conclusion

The results showed a significant difference in total excursion of rearfoot inversion/eversion of the flat foot unstable group compared to the other groups.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Physical Education and Sports Science, Nanyang Technological University

References

  1. Tong J, Kong P: Association between foot type and lower extremity injuries: a systematic literature review with meta-analysis. J. Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2013, (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar
  2. Bell D, Guskiewicz K, Clark M, Padua D: Systemic review of the Balance Error Scoring System. Sports Health. 2011, 3 (3): 287-295. 10.1177/1941738111403122.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Burns J, Keenan A, Redmond A: Foot type and overse injury in triathletes. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association. 2005, 95 (3): 235-241.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chuter V: Relationships between foot type and dynamic rearfoot frontal plane motion. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2010, 3 (9): 10.1186/1757-1146-3-9.
  5. Cornwall M, McPoil T, Lebec M, Vicenzino B, Wilson J: Reliability of the Modified Foot Posture Index. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2008, 98 (1): 7-13.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cote K, Brunet M, Gansneder B, Shultz S: Effects of pronated and supinated foot postures on static and dynamic postural stability. Journal of Athl Train. 2005, 40 (1): 41-46.Google Scholar
  7. Docherty C, Valovich McLeod T, Shultz S: Postural control deficits in participants with functional ankle instability as measured by the balance error scoring system. Clin J Sport Med. 2006, 16 (3): 203-208. 10.1097/00042752-200605000-00003.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Fan Y, Fan Y, Li Z, Li C, Luo D: Natural gaits of the non-pathological flat foot and high arched foot. PLos ONE. 2011, 6 (3): e17749-10.1371/journal.pone.0017749. Retrieved from doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017749PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hunt A, Smith R: Mechanics and control of the flat versus normal foot during the stance phase of walking. Clinical Biomechanics. 2004, 19: 391-197. 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2003.12.010.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Keenan A, Redmond A, Horton M, Conaghan P, Tennant A: The Foot Posture Index: Rasch Analysis of a novel foot specific outcome measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007, 88: 88-83. 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.10.005.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Levinger P, Murley G, Barton C, Cotchett M, McSweeney S, Menz H: A comparison of foot kinematics in people with normal and flat arched foot using the Oxford Foot Model. Gait and Posture. 2010, 32: 519-523. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2010.07.013.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Liu K, Uygur M, Kaminski T: Effect of ankle instability on gait reports. Athletic Training and Sports Health Care. 2012, 4: 10.3928/19425864-20120523-01.Google Scholar
  13. Redmond A, Crane Y, Menz H: Normative values for the Foot Posture Index. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2008, 10.1186/1757-1146-1-6.Google Scholar
  14. Ridder R, Willems T, Roosen P: Plantar pressure distribution during gait and runnning in subjects with chronic ankle instability. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research. 2012, 10.1186/1757-1146-5-S1-P32.Google Scholar

Copyright

© Ho and Tan; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 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.

Advertisement