Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Mean differences and statistical significance for spatio-temporal variables for shod and barefoot walking.

From: Effect of children's shoes on gait: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Variable Shoe Condition Authors n Weighting Mean difference [95%CI] Statistical significance: z Score (P) Heterogeneity: I 2%
Velocity (m/s) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 898 94.0% 0.07 [0.06, 0.09] - 98%
  Unknown Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] 61 2.2% 0.05 [-0.01, 0.12] - -
  Athletic Oeffinger et al. [9] 14 0.8% 0.04 [-0.08, 0.16] - -
  Oxford Wegener et al.[23] 20 0.9% 0.03 [-0.08, 0.14] - -
  Walking Wolf et al. [8] 18 1.4% -0.01 [-0.10, 0.08] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 1011 100.0% 0.07 [0.06, 0.08] 12.97 (P < 0.00001) 97%
  Walking (greater flexibility) Wolf et al. [8] 18 100.0% 0.02 [-0.07, 0.11] 0.41 (P = 0.68) N/A
Stride length (m) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 781 97.60% 0.11 [0.11, 0.12] - 97%
  Unknown Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] 61 1.10% 0.07 [0.02, 0.12] - -
  Athletic Oeffinger et al. [9] 14 0.30% 0.12 [0.02, 0.21] - -
  Oxford Wegener et al. [23] 20 0.20% 0.11 [0.00, 0.22] - -
  Walking Wolf et al. [8] 18 0.70% 0.07 [0.01, 0.13] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 894 100.0% 0.11 [0.10, 0.12] 40.49 (P < 0.00001) 93%
  Walking (greater flexibility) Wolf et al. [8] 18 100.0% 0.06 [-0.01, 0.13] 1.71 (P = 0.09) N/A
Step length (%) Walking Kristen et al. [15] 30 6.2% 0.20 [-2.26, 2.66] - -
  Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 781 87.5% 9.69 [8.77, 10.61] - 100%
  Unknown Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] 61 6.3% 6.57 [4.14, 8.99] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 872 100.0% 8.90 [8.04, 9.77] 20.16 (P < 0.00001) 100%
Length (m) Oxford Wilkinson et al. [20] 31 100.0% 0.03 [-0.01, 0.07] 1.52 (P = 0.13) N/A
  Athletic Wilkinson et al. [20] 30 100.0% 0.04 [0.00, 0.07] 2.25 (P = 0.02) N/A
Stride time (s) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 790 94.0% 0.03 [0.02, 0.04] - 99%
  Oxford Wegener et al. [23] 20 2.6% 0.08 [0.03, 0.13] - -
  Walking Wolf et al. [8] 18 3.4% 0.07 [0.03, 0.11] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 828 100.0% 0.03 [0.02, 0.04] 7.61 (P < 0.00001) 99%
  Walking (greater flexibility) Wolf et al. [8] 18 100.0% 0.03 [-0.01, 0.07] 1.50 (P = 0.13) N/A
Step time (s) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 728 100.0% 0.01 [0.01, 0.02] 5.25 (P < 0.00001) 99%
Time Oxford Wilkinson et al. [20] 31 100.0% -0.40 [-1.98, 1.18] 0.50 (P = 0.62) N/A
  Athletic Wilkinson et al. [20] 30 100.0% -0.20 [-1.98, 1.58] 0.22 (P = 0.83) N/A
Cadence (steps/min) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 471 70.5% -5.68 [-9.05, -2.31] - 100%
  Unknown Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] 61 11.0% -3.51 [-8.51, 1.49] - -
  Athletic Oeffinger et al. [9] 14 4.2% -8.30 [-19.76, 3.16] - -
  Oxford Wilkinson et al. [20] 31 4.1% -2.10 [-13.80, 9.60] - -
  Walking Wolf et al. [8] 18 10.3% -8.70 [-14.11, -3.29] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 564 100.0% -5.71 [-8.39, -3.02] 4.16 (P < 0.0001) 99%
  Oxford Wilkinson et al. [20] 31 100.0% -0.20 [-9.99, 9.59 0.04 (P = 0.97) N/A
  Walking (greater flexibility) Wolf et al. [8] 18 100.0% -4.60 [-9.99, 0.79] 1.67 (P = 0.09) N/A
Support base (m) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 753 99.1% 0.01 [0.00, 0.01] - 89%
  Oxford Wegener et al. [23] 20 0.5% 0.01 [-0.01, 0.03] - -
  Oxford Wilkinson et al. [20] 31 0.4% 0.01 [-0.00, 0.03] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 804 100.0% 0.01 [0.00, 0.01] 9.23 (P < 0.00001) 96%
  Athletic Wilkinson et al. [20] 30 100.0% 0.00 [-0.01, 0.02] 0.49 (P = 0.62) N/A
Toe-off (%) of gait cycle Walking Wolf et al. [8] 18 100.0% 2.30 [1.61, 2.99] 6.56 (P < 0.00001) N/A
  Walking (greater flexibility) Wolf et al. [8] 18 100.0% 2.20 [1.51, 2.89] 6.28 (P < 0.00001) N/A
Double support (%) Athletic Lythgo et al.* 898 100.0% 1.53 [1.30, 1.77] - 99%
  Oxford Wegener et al. [23] 20 0.0% 2.49 [-14.15, 19.13] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 918 100.0% 1.54 [1.27, 1.80] 11.40 (P < 0.00001) 99%
Single support (%) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 898 100.0% -0.79 [-0.92, -0.65] 11.26 (P < 0.00001) 99%
Stance time (%) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 898 98.50% 0.81 [0.70, 0.92] - -
  Unknown Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] 61 1.5% 0.74 [-0.12, 1.60] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 959 100.0% 0.81 [0.70, 0.92] 14.24 (P < 0.00001) 98%
Swing time (%) Shoe Moreno-Hernandez et al.[10] 61 100.0% -0.74 [-1.60, 0.12] 1.68 (P = 0.09) N/A
Contact time (ms) Walking Kristen et al. [15] 30 100% 49.00 [-9.88, 107.88] 1.63 (P = 0.10) N/A
Angle of gait (°) Athletic Lythgo et al. [7]* 898 99.9% -0.03 [-0.34, 0.28] - 98%
  Walking Wolf et al. [8] 18 0.1% -3.10 [-16.02, 9.82] - -
  Combined Pooled effect 916 100.0% -0.03 [-0.35, 0.29] 0.19 (P = 0.85) 98%
  Walking (greater flexibility) Wolf et al. [8] 18 100.0% -2.50 [-5.58, 0.58] 1.59 (P = 0.11) N/A
Progression angle (°) Oxford Wilkinson et al. [20] 31 100.0% -2.50 [-7.32, 2.32] 1.02 (P = 0.31) N/A
  Athletic Wilkinson et al. [20] 30 100.0% -0.40 [-5.19, 4.39] 0.16 (P = 0.87) N/A
  1. A negative mean difference value indicates a decrease during shod walking compared to barefoot walking. *Pooled effect calculated using inverse variance method in Review manager 5.0 for all eligible reported data. N/A indicates not applicable.