The relationship of static foot structure to dynamic foot function

Cavanagh, P. R.<sup>1</sup>; Morag, E.<sup>1</sup>; Boulton, A. J. M.<sup>2</sup>; Young, M. J.<sup>2</sup>; Deffner, K. T.<sup>1</sup>; Pammer, S. E.<sup>3</sup>

Affiliations

¹Center for Locomotion Studies, 10 IM Building, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, U.S.A.

²The University Department of Medicine, Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester. U.K.

³Department of Statistics, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, U.S.A.

Abstract and keywords

Many theories have been advanced concerning the relationship between structure and function in the human foot, yet few of these theories have been subjected to quantitative examination. In this study, foot structure was characterized by 27 measurements taken from standardized lateral and dorsi-plantar weight-bearing plain radiographs of 50 healthy adult subjects. regional plantar pressure distribution data collected from the same feet were chosen as the functional measures. A stepwise regression analysis was performed to (1) explore what portion of the variance in peak plantar pressure during walking can be explained by the radiographic measurements, and (2) identify structural characteristics of the foot which are significant predictors of peak plantar pressure under the heel and the first metatarsal head (MTH1).

Most of the radiographic measurements were highly reliable. However, only 31 and 38% of the variance in peak plantar pressure at the heel and MTH1, respectively, could be explained using multiple regression analyses with the radiographic measurements as independent variables. Among the structural predictors that were identified, soft tissue thickness (e.g. calcaneus or sesamoid heights), and arch-related measurements were the strongest predictors of plantar pressure under both the heel and the first metatarsal head. We conclude that, in normal subjects, only about 35% of the variance in dynamic plantar pressure can be explained by the measurements of foot structure derived from radiographs. This implies that the dynamics of gait are likely to exert the major influence on plantar pressure during walking.

Keywords: Foot; Radiographs; Plantar pressure; Walking; Structure

Links

DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9290(96)00136-4

PubMed: 9119823

WoS: A1997WF17000005

History

Revised: 1996-08-5

Cited Works (3)

Year	Entry
1986	Gooding GAW, Stess RM, Graf PM, Moss KM, Louie KS, Grunfeld C. Sonography of the sole of the foot: evidence for loss of foot pad thickness in diabetes and its relationship to ulceration of the foot. Invest Radiol. January 1986;21(1):45-48.
1979	Stokes IAF, Hutton WC, Stott JRR, Lowe LW. Forces under the hallux valgus foot before and after surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979;142:64-72.
1978	James SL, Bates BT, Osternig LR. Injuries to runners. Am J Sports Med. 1978;6(2):40-50.

Cited By (16)

Year	Entry
1999	Leardini A, Benedetti MG, Catani F, Simoncini L, Giannini S. An anatomically based protocol for the description of foot segment kinematics during gait. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 1999;14(8):528-536.
2006	Spears IR, Miller-Young JE. The effect of heel-pad thickness and loading protocol on measured heel-pad stiffness and a standardized protocol for inter-subject comparability. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). February 2006;21(2):204-212.
2012	Isvilanonda V, Dengler E, Iaquinto JM, Sangeorzan BJ, Ledoux WR. Finite element analysis of the foot: model validation and comparison between two common treatments of the clawed hallux deformity. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). October 2012;27(8):837-844.
2000	Cavanagh PR, Ulbrecht JS, Caputo GM. New developments in the biomechanics of the diabetic foot. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. September–October 2000;16(suppl 1):S6-S10.
2012	Carson DW, Myer GD, Hewett TE, Heidt RS Jr, Ford KR. Increased plantar force and impulse in American football players with high arch compared to normal arch. Foot. December 2012;22(4):310-314.
2003	MacWilliams BA, Cowley M, Nicholson DE. Foot kinematics and kinetics during adolescent gait. Gait Post. 2003;17(3):214-224.
2007	Leardini A, Benedetti MG, Berti L, Bettinelli D, Nativo R, Giannini S. Rear-foot, mid-foot and fore-foot motion during the stance phase of gait. Gait Post. 2007;25(3):453-462.
1999	Cavanagh P. Plantar soft tissue thickness during ground contact in walking. J Biomech. June 1999;32(6):623-628.
2009	Rao S, Baumhauer JF, Tome J, Nawoczenski DA. Comparison of in vivo segmental foot motion during walking and step descent in patients with midfoot arthritis and matched asymptomatic control subjects. J Biomech. May 29, 2009;42(8):1054-1060.
2009	Tao K, Wang D, Wang C, Wang X, Liu A, Nester CJ, Howard D. An in vivo experimental validation of a computational model of human foot. J Bionic Eng. 2009;6(4):387-397.
1997	Morag E. Structural and Functional Factors That Determine Regional Peak Pressures Under the Foot During Walking [PhD thesis]. State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University; May 1997.
1997	Lee S. Dynamic Characterization of Relative Forefoot Abduction [Master's thesis]. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary; November 1997.
1998	Stacoff AP. Skeletal Lower Extremity Motions During Running [PhD thesis]. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary; August 1998.
2003	Miller-Young JE. Factors Affecting Human Heel Pad Mechanics: A Finite Element Study [PhD thesis]. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary; April 2003.
2003	Nurse MA. Effects of Cutaneous Afferent Feedback from the Feet on Human Gait Patterns [PhD thesis]. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary; January 2003.
2006	Monteleone BJ. Effects of Functional Ankle Instability on Ankle Joint Complex Dynamics and Motor Control [PhD thesis]. Calgary, AB: University of Calgary; August 2006.