Reliability and Normative Values for the Foot Mobility Magnitude: a Composite Measure of Vertical and Medial-lateral Mobility of the Midfoot

Overview

Journal J Foot Ankle Res

Publisher Wiley

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2009 Mar 10

PMID 19267907

Citations 42

Authors

Thomas G McPoil

Bill Vicenzino

Mark W Cornwall

Natalie Collins

Meghan Warren

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: A study was conducted to determine the reliability and minimal detectable change for a new composite measure of the vertical and medial-lateral mobility of the midfoot called the foot mobility magnitude.

Methods: Three hundred and forty-five healthy participants volunteered to take part in the study. The change in dorsal arch height between weight bearing and non-weight bearing as well as the change in midfoot width between weight bearing and non-weight bearing were measured at 50% of total foot length and used to calculate the foot mobility magnitude. The reliability and minimal detectable change for the measurements were then determined based on the assessment of the measurements by three raters with different levels of clinical experience.

Results: The change in dorsal arch height between weight bearing and non-weight bearing, midfoot width between weight bearing and non-weight bearing, and the foot mobility magnitude were shown to have high levels of intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Normative data are provided for the left and right feet of both the female (n = 211) and male (n = 134) subjects.

Conclusion: While the measurements of navicular drop and drift have been used as a clinical method to assess both the vertical and medial-lateral mobility of the midfoot, poor to fair levels of inter-rater reliability have been reported. The results of the current study suggest that the foot mobility magnitude provides the clinician and researcher with a highly reliable measure of vertical and medial-lateral midfoot mobility.

Citing Articles

Cushioning mechanism of the metatarsals during landing for the skateboarding ollie maneuver.

Wu Y, Wang H, Deng C, Guo Y, Zhu X Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2024; 12:1382161.

PMID: 38712330 PMC: 11070832. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1382161.

Risk factors and associated factors for calcaneal apophysitis (Sever's disease): a systematic review.

Nieto-Gil P, Marco-Lledo J, Garcia-Campos J, Ruiz-Munoz M, Gijon-Nogueron G, Ramos-Petersen L BMJ Open. 2023; 13(6):e064903.

PMID: 37280033 PMC: 10254686. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064903.

The interrelationship between three-dimensional foot mobility and bodyweight bearing.

Sato T, Fukui T, Kawata S, Nagahori K, Miyaso H, Li Z J Phys Ther Sci. 2023; 35(3):199-203.

PMID: 36866006 PMC: 9974320. DOI: 10.1589/jpts.35.199.

Shoes for self-managing chronic hip Pain: the SCHIPP randomized clinical trial protocol.

Paterson K, Bennell K, Metcalf B, Jones S, Campbell P, McManus F BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023; 24(1):141.

PMID: 36814221 PMC: 9948330. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06235-x.

Effect of motion control versus neutral walking footwear on pain associated with lateral tibiofemoral joint osteoarthritis: a comparative effectiveness randomised clinical trial.

Paterson K, Bennell K, Metcalf B, Campbell P, McManus F, Lamb K BMJ Open. 2022; 12(9):e061627.

PMID: 36153016 PMC: 9511570. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061627.

References

Menz H . Alternative techniques for the clinical assessment of foot pronation. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1998; 88(3):119-29. DOI: 10.7547/87507315-88-3-119. View

Sell K, Verity T, Worrell T, Pease B, WIGGLESWORTH J . Two measurement techniques for assessing subtalar joint position: a reliability study. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1994; 19(3):162-7. DOI: 10.2519/jospt.1994.19.3.162. View

Wolf P, Stacoff A, Liu A, Nester C, Arndt A, Lundberg A . Functional units of the human foot. Gait Posture. 2008; 28(3):434-41. DOI: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2008.02.004. View

Picciano A, Rowlands M, Worrell T . Reliability of open and closed kinetic chain subtalar joint neutral positions and navicular drop test. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993; 18(4):553-8. DOI: 10.2519/jospt.1993.18.4.553. View

Williams D, McClay I . Measurements used to characterize the foot and the medial longitudinal arch: reliability and validity. Phys Ther. 2000; 80(9):864-71. View

Shrout P, Fleiss J . Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979; 86(2):420-8. DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.86.2.420. View

Brushoj C, Langberg H, Larsen K, Nielsen M, Holmich P . Reliability and normative values of the foot line test: a technique to assess foot posture. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007; 37(11):703-7. DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2007.2525. View

Cowan D, Jones B, Robinson J . Foot morphologic characteristics and risk of exercise-related injury. Arch Fam Med. 1993; 2(7):773-7. DOI: 10.1001/archfami.2.7.773. View

Vicenzino B, Collins N, Cleland J, McPoil T . A clinical prediction rule for identifying patients with patellofemoral pain who are likely to benefit from foot orthoses: a preliminary determination. Br J Sports Med. 2008; 44(12):862-6. DOI: 10.1136/bjsm.2008.052613. View

10.

Song J, Hillstrom H, SECORD D, Levitt J . Foot type biomechanics. comparison of planus and rectus foot types. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1996; 86(1):16-23. DOI: 10.7547/87507315-86-1-16. View

11.

Brody D . Techniques in the evaluation and treatment of the injured runner. Orthop Clin North Am. 1982; 13(3):541-58. View

12.

Stratford P, Goldsmith C . Use of the standard error as a reliability index of interest: an applied example using elbow flexor strength data. Phys Ther. 1997; 77(7):745-50. DOI: 10.1093/ptj/77.7.745. View

13.

Shultz S, Nguyen A, Windley T, Kulas A, Botic T, Beynnon B . Intratester and intertester reliability of clinical measures of lower extremity anatomic characteristics: implications for multicenter studies. Clin J Sport Med. 2006; 16(2):155-61. DOI: 10.1097/00042752-200603000-00012. View

14.

McPoil T, Cornwall M, Medoff L, Vicenzino B, Forsberg K, Hilz D . Arch height change during sit-to-stand: an alternative for the navicular drop test. J Foot Ankle Res. 2008; 1(1):3. PMC: 2553777. DOI: 10.1186/1757-1146-1-3. View

15.

Landis J, Koch G . The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977; 33(1):159-74. View

16.

Cornwall M, McPoil T . Relative movement of the navicular bone during normal walking. Foot Ankle Int. 1999; 20(8):507-12. DOI: 10.1177/107110079902000808. View

17.

Evans A, Copper A, Scharfbillig R, Scutter S, Williams M . Reliability of the foot posture index and traditional measures of foot position. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2003; 93(3):203-13. DOI: 10.7547/87507315-93-3-203. View

18.

Cavanagh P, Rodgers M . The arch index: a useful measure from footprints. J Biomech. 1987; 20(5):547-51. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(87)90255-7. View

19.

McPoil T, Cornwall M . Use of the longitudinal arch angle to predict dynamic foot posture in walking. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2005; 95(2):114-20. DOI: 10.7547/0950114. View

20.

McPoil T, Cornwall M . Prediction of dynamic foot posture during running using the longitudinal arch angle. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2007; 97(2):102-7. DOI: 10.7547/0970102. View