Skip to main content

Table 3 Outcome measures Skeletal Geometry

From: Effectiveness of therapeutic footwear for children: A systematic review

OutcomeStudyConditionGroupBaseline Mean (SD ±/-)Final Mean (SD ±/-)Statistical Result (Significant values given in bold)
Corrective Therapeutic Footwear
 3D Laser scanning
  Bean shaped ratioChen et al. (2015) [16]CTEVGroup 1 CTF and DBN/A0.29 (0.27-0.30)aOne-way MANOVA: p=0.002
Group 2 DB and Own footwearN/A0.31 (0.29-0.33) aPost hoc:
Group 3 vs. 1 p<0.01
Group 3 FAS and CTFN/A0.27 (0.25-0.28) aGroup 3 vs. 2 p<0.01 |
  Bimalleolar angle (°)Chen et al. (2015) [16]CTEVGroup 1 CTF and DBN/A75.59 (73.98-77.21) aOne-way MANOVA: p=0.032
Group 2 DB and Own footwearN/A72.98 (69.03-6.92) aPost hoc:
Group 2 vs. 3 p<0.01 |
Group 3 FAS and CTFN/A77.55 (75.57-79.53) a
 Radiographic (Anterior-Posterior view)
  Talo calcaneal angle (°)Kanatli et al. (2016) [12]Mobile pes planusGroup 1 CTF34d (22-53) b23d (12-37) bWilcoxon signed rank:
Group1 p=0.002; Group 2 p=0.003
Group 2 Own footwear33d (20-45) b30d (13-37) bMann Whitney U:
Group 1 vs.2 p=0.19
Wenger et al. (1989) [37]Mobile pes planusGroup 1 CTF36.2 (1.2) c29.4 (0.74) cOne Way ANOVA: p>0.5
Group 2 SLF36.3 (0.99) c31.5 (1.2) c
Group 3 CTF with Helfet heel cup37.1 (0.84) c30 (0.77) c
Group 4 SLF with UCBL36.8 (0.97) c30.1 (0.82) c
 Radiographic (Lateral view)
  Calcaneal pitch (°)Kanatli et al. (2016) [12]Mobile pes planusGroup 1 CTF12d (2-20) b15d (4-20) bWilcoxon signed rank:
Group 1 p=0.002;
Group 2 p=0.001
Group 2 Own footwear10d (1-16) b14d (4-22) bMann Whitney U:
Group 1 vs. 2 p=0.18
  Talar 1st metatarsal angle (°)Kanatli et al. (2016) [12]Mobile pes planusGroup 1 CTF16d (7-29) b10d (0-26) bWilcoxon signed rank:
Group 1 p=0.001;
Group 2 p=0.001
Group 2 Own footwear18.4d (6-35) b9.3d (0-34) bMann Whitney U:
Group 1 vs. 2 p=0.72
Wenger et al. (1989) [37]Mobile pes planusGroup 1 CTF19.1 (0.75) c11.7 (0.84) cOne-way ANOVA: p>0.5
Group 2 SLF16.7 (0.87) c11.8 (0.91) c
Group 3 CTF with Helfet heel cup16.8 (0.76) c11.5 (0.67) c
Group 4 SLF with UCBL19.7 (0.83) c11.3 (0.98) c
  Talo calcaneal angle (°)Kanatli et al. (2016) [12]Mobile pes planusGroup 1 CTF46d (27-56) b44d (32-57) bWilcoxon signed rank:
Group1 p=0.736;
Group 2 p=0.113
Group 2 Own footwear46d (34-55) b43d (32-51) bMann Whitney U:
Group 1 vs. 2 p=0.24
  Talar horizontal angle (°)Kanatli et al. (2016) [12]Mobile pes planusGroup 1 CTF34d (16-49) b29d (19-42) bWilcoxon signed rank:
Group 1 p=0.003;
Group 2 p=0.001
Group 2 Own footwear35d (21-52) b27d (21-44) bMann Whitney U:
Group 1 vs. 2 p=0.09
Wenger et al. (1989) [37]Mobile pes planusGroup 1 CTF40.5 (0.70) c34 (0.66) cOne Way ANOVA: p>0.4
Group 2 SLF39.8 (0.71) c34.7 (0.73) c
Group 3 CTF with Helfet heel cup39.5 (0.6) c34.7 (0.61) c
Group 4 SLF with UCBL41.8 (0.78) c34.2 (0.84) c
Functional Stability Therapeutic Footwear
 Radiographic (Anterior-Posterior view)
  Talocalcaneal angle (°)Basta et al. (1977) [39]Symptomatic mobile pes planusGroup 1 Change from BF wearing FSTF-4.2 No Statistical test for significance performed
Group 1 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF + CNP -1
Group2 Change from BF with FSTF-3.8 
Group 2 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF+CNP -1.5
Group 3 -6No Data ReportedNo Data Reported
Group 7 Change from BF wearing FSTF-4.1 
Group 7 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF + CNP -1.4
 Radiographic (Lateral view)
  Calcaneal pitch (°)Basta et al. (1977) [39]Symptomatic mobile pes planusGroup 1 Change from BF wearing FSTF1.8 No Statistical test for significance performed
Group 1 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF + CNP 2.1
Group2 Change from BF with FSTF1.8 
Group 2 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF+CNP 2
Group 3 -6No Data ReportedNo Data Reported
Group 7 Change from BF wearing FSTF2.1 
Group 7 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF + CNP 1.55
  Longitudinal arch angle (°)  Group 1 Change from BF wearing FSTF-2.75 No Statistical test for significance performed
Group 1 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF + CNP -0.9
Group2 Change from BF with FSTF-2.5 
Group 2 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF + CNP -0.9
Group 3 -6No Data ReportedNo Data Reported
Group 7 Change from BF wearing FSTF-2.6 
Group 7 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF+CNP -1.2
  Talo calcaneal angle (°)  Group 1 Change from BF wearing FSTF0.9 No Statistical test for significance performed
Group 1 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF + CNP -1.35
Group2 Change from BF with FSTF0.7 
Group 2 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF + CNP -1.25
Group 3 -6No Data ReportedNo Data Reported
Group 7 Change from BF wearing FSTF0.8 
Group 7 Change from FSTF wearing FSTF+CNP -1.3
Functional Lift Therapeutic Footwear
 3D stereovideographic
  Anteroposterior shift of sacral 1 (mm)Zabjek et al. (2001) [44]Idiopathic scoliosisBF vs. FLTF12 (19)7 (5)Paired t test: p>0.05
  Anteroposterior shift thoracic 1 (mm)BF vs. FLTF32 (20)7 (7)p<0.05
  Anteroposterior shift shoulders/pelvis (mm)BF vs. FLTF20 (18)6 (5)p<0.05
  Diff in height left-right tibia (mm)BF vs. FLTF-3 (5)11 (4)p<0.05
  Diff in height left-right trochanter (mm)BF vs. FLTF-10 (10)15 (6)p<0.05
Kyphosis (%)BF vs. FLTF7 (3)0.6 (0.6)p>0.05
  Lateral shift sacral 1 (mm)BF vs. FLTF1 (10)9 (6)p<0.05
  Lateral shift shoulder/pelvis (mm)BF vs. FLTF12 (10)4 (3)p>0.05
  Lateral shift thoracic 1 (mm)BF vs. FLTF13 (15)9 (7)p>0.05
  Lordosis (%)BF vs. FLTF4 (2)0.5 (0.5)p>0.05
  Pelvic rotation (°)BF vs. FLTF0.4 (4)2 (2)p>0.05
  Pelvic tilt (°)BF vs. FLTF3 (1)3 (1)p<0.05
  Rotation shoulder/pelvis (°)BF vs. FLTF1 (4)1 (1)p>0.05
  Shoulder rotation (°)BF vs. FLTF1 (4)2 (2)p>0.05
  Shoulder tilt (°)BF vs. FLTF0.4 (2)0.8 (0.6)p<0.05
  Tilt shoulder/pelvis (°)BF vs. FLTF-2 (2)3 (2)p<0.05
  Vertical height of sacral 1 (mm)BF vs. FLTF897 (84)5 (3)p<0.05
  Vertical height of thoracic 1 (mm)BF vs. FLTF1279 (117)6 (3)p<0.05
  Version left iliac bone (°)BF vs. FLTF-11 (4)1 (1)p<0.05
  Version right iliac bone (°)BF vs. FLTF-10 (4)2 (1)p<0.05
  Diff in version right and left iliac (°)BF vs. FLTF-0.5 (2)2 (1)p<0.05
  1. BF Barefoot, CNP Customised Navicular Pad, CTEV Congenital Talipes Equino Varus, CTF Corrective Therapeutic Footwear, DB Denis Brown Barred Night Boot, FAS Forefoot Abduct Night Shoe, FLTF Functional Lift Therapeutic Footwear, N/A Not Applicable, SLF Standard Last Footwear, SSF Standard Sole Footwear, UCBL University of California Biomechanics Laboratory, a95% Confidence Interval, bMin-Max, cStandard Error, dMedian,