Skip to main content

Table 3 Segment angle (in degree) comparisons between groups

From: Difference in the foot intersegmental coordination pattern between female lacrosse players with and without a history of medial Tibial stress syndrome; a cross-sectional study

 

Segments

Motions

MTSShistorya

Nohistorya

P value

95% CI

Effectsize

Peak angle

Rearfoot

DF

17.7 ± 2.4

15.0 ± 2.7

*0.019

0.5 to 4.8

1.03

Ev

5.1 ± 2.6

3.9 ± 4.1

0.393

−1.7 to 4.1

0.36

Midfoot

DF

9.7 ± 2.9

9.9 ± 2.6

0.817

−2.6 to 2.1

0.1

Ev

4.6 ± 1.8

5.4 ± 3.1

0.434

−3 to 1.3

0.33

Forefoot

DF

2.8 ± 1.3

2.9 ± 1.1

0.836

−1.1 to 0.9

0.09

Inv

0.6 ± 1

0.8 ± 1.2

0.775

− 0.8 to 1.1

0.12

Excursion

Rearfoot

DF-PF

34.5 ± 4.5

29.6 ± 2.1

*0.003

1.9 to 7.9

1.38

Ev-Inv

8.3 ± 2.9

6.2 ± 2.1

0.059

− 0.1 to 4.2

0.81

Midfoot

DF-PF

15.4 ± 3.7

19.1 ± 3.8

*0.024

−6.9 to − 0.5

0.99

Ev-Inv

5.2 ± 2.4

6.1 ± 1.6

0.287

−2.7 to 0.8

0.45

Forefoot

DF-PF

6.0 ± 2.4

5.9 ± 2.1

0.913

−1.8 to 2

0.05

Ev-Inv

2.8 ± 1.1

3.9 ± 0.8

*0.011

0.3 to 1.9

1.13

  1. Abbrebiation: DF dorsiflexion, PF plantar flexion, Ev eversion, Inv inversion
  2. aValuses are mean ± SD, *Significant differences between groups