The association of foot structure and footwear fit with disability in children and adolescents with Down syndrome

Table 6 Multivariate logistic regression analyses with OxAFQ-C Emotional domain scores as the dependent variable ^a,b

	OxAFQ-C Emotional domain score^c
Independent variables	OR (95% CI)^d	Change in NagelkerkeR²	pvalue
Foot structure
Arch Index^e	1.06 (0.97 to 1.16)	0.174	0.217
Hallux valgus (presence)	10.48 (0.76 to 144.17)	0.112	0.121
Lesser toe deformity (presence)	3.92 (0.33 to 46.75)	0.128	0.279
Footwear fit^f
Length (ill-fitting/lower median)^g	3.78 (0.88 to 16.16)	0.199	0.073
Width (ill-fitting/lower median)^g	5.11 (1.26 to 20.70)	0.135	0.022

^aAdjusted for sex, age and body mass index.
^bParent-reported Oxford Ankle Foot Questionnaire for Children (OxAFQ-C) domain scores were based on n = 49 due to missing data.
^cOxAFQ-C Emotional domain scores were dichotomised where the lowest quartile was classified as ‘disability’ and the upper three quartiles were classified as ‘no disability’.
^dOR: Odds ratio.
^eArch Index multiplied by hundred.
^fLogistic regression analyses performed for footwear fit were based on n = 48 due to missing data.
^gIll-fitting: representing the greatest disparity between the participant’s foot and footwear length and width dimensions; expressed as a percentage. The values that defined the lower median (ill-fitting) were as follows: length (shoe 14.3% shorter to 10.8% longer than foot), width (shoe 26.5% to 4.9% narrower than foot).

ISSN: 1757-1146