advertising
-
1.
Ireland, ML and SM Ott. :The effects of pregnancy on the musculoskeletal system. .Clin Orthop Relat Res 372::169. ,2000. .
-
2.
Ochsenbein-Kölble, N, M Roos, T Gasser, et al. :Cross-sectional study of weight gain and increase in BMI throughout pregnancy. .Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 130::180. ,2007. .
-
3.
Javaid, MK, SR Crozier, NC Harvey, et al. :Southampton Women’s Survey Study Group: Maternal and seasonal predictors of change in calcaneal quantitative ultrasound during pregnancy. .J Clin Endocrinol Metab 90::5182. ,2005. .
-
4.
Sekine, Y, N Matsunaga, A Kokaze, et al. :Effects of nutrient and food intake on calcaneous bone mass among healthy Japanese women in the predelivery and postpartum periods. .J Womens Health (Larchmt) 12::643. ,2003. .
-
5.
Schmidt, MD, P Pekow, PS Freedson, et al. :Physical activity patterns during pregnancy in a diverse population of women. .J Womens Health (Larchmt) 15::909. ,2006. .
-
6.
Tejada Perez, P, A Cohen, A Font, et al. :Modificaciones fisiológicas del embarazo e implicaciones farmacológicas: maternas, fetales y neonatales. .Rev Obstet Ginecol Venez 67::246. ,2007. .
-
7.
Borg-Stein, J and SA Dugan. :Musculoskeletal disorders of pregnancy, delivery and postpartum. .Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 18::459. ,2007. .
-
8.
Bird, AR, HB Menz, and CC Hyde. :The effect of pregnancy on footprint parameters: a prospective investigation. .JAPMA 89::405. ,1999. .
-
9.
Goldsmith, LT and G Weiss. :Relaxin in human pregnancy. .Ann N Y Acad Sci 1160::130. ,2009. .
-
10.
Robinson, HS, AM Mengshoel, MB Veierød, et al. :Pelvic girdle pain: potential risk factors in pregnancy in relation to disability and pain intensity three months postpartum. .Man Ther 15::522. ,2010. .
-
11.
Vøllestad, NK and B Stuge. :Prognostic factors for recovery from postpartum pelvic girdle pain. .Eur Spine J 18::718. ,2009. .
-
12.
Mogren, I . :Perceived health six months after delivery in women who have experienced low back pain and pelvic pain during pregnancy. .Scand J Caring Sci 21::447. ,2007. .
-
13.
Mogren, I . :Perceived health, sick leave, psychosocial situation, and sexual life in women with low-back pain and pelvic pain during pregnancy. .Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 85::647. ,2006. .
-
14.
Ponnapula, P and JS Boberg. :Lower extremity changes experienced during pregnancy. .J Foot Ankle Surg 49::452. ,2010. .
-
15.
Alvarez, R, IA Stokes, DE Asprinio, et al. :Dimensional changes of the feet in pregnancy. .J Bone Joint Surg Am 70::271. ,1988. .
-
16.
Karadag-Saygi, E, F Unlu-Ozkan, and A Basgul. :Plantar pressure and foot pain in the last trimester of pregnancy. .Foot Ankle Int 31::153. ,2010. .
-
17.
Hisaw, FL . :Experimental relaxation of the pubic ligament of the guinea pig. .Proc Soc Exper Biol Med 23::661. ,1926. .
-
18.
Zarrow, M, EG Holmstrom, and HA Salhanick. :The concentration of relaxin in the blood serum and other tissues of women during pregnancy. .J Clin Endocrinol 15::22. ,1955. .
-
19.
Abramson, D, SM Roberts, and PD Wilson. :Relaxation of the pelvic joints in pregnancy. .Surg Gynecol Obstet 58::595. ,1934. .
-
20.
Calguneri, M, HA Bird, and V Wright. :Changes in joint laxity occurring during pregnancy. .Ann Rheum Dis 41::126. ,1982. .
-
21.
Wetz, HH, J Hentschel, B Drerup, et al. :Changes in shape and size of the foot during pregnancy [in German]. .Orthopade 35::1124. ,2006. .
-
22.
Dunning, K, G LeMasters, L Levin, et al. :Falls in workers during pregnancy: risk factors, job hazards, and high risk occupations. .Am J Ind Med 44::664. ,2003. .
-
23.
Ramiro, J, G Brizuela, and S Llana. : “Biomecanica y Calzado. ,” inGuía de Recomendaciones para el Diseño de Calzado. , p25. ,Instituto de Biomecánica de Valencia. ,Valencia, Spain. ,1995. .
-
24.
Redmond, AC, J Crosbie, and RA Ouvrier. :Development and validation of a novel rating system for scoring standing foot posture: the Foot Posture Index. .Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 21::89. ,2006. .
-
25.
Gartland, D, S Brown, S Donath, et al. :Women’s health in early pregnancy: findings from an Australian nulliparous cohort study. .Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 50::413. ,2010. .
-
26.
Seelbach-Göbel, B and K-H Wulf. : “Untersu-chungen während der Schwangerschaft. Risikoschwangerschaften. ,” inKlinik der Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, ,4th Ed. , edited byBender, HG, K Diedrich, and W Künzel. (Hrsg), p111. ,Urban & Fischer. ,Munich. ,2000. .
-
27.
Palomo Toucedo, IC, PV Munuera Martínez, G Domínguez Maldonado, et al. :Influencia del embarazo en el desarrollo del HAV: estudio preliminar. .Podol Clín 10::17. ,2009. .
-
28.
Nyska, M, D Sofer, A Porat, et al. :Plantar foot pressures in pregnant women. .Isr J Med Sci 33::139. ,1997. .
-
29.
Block, RA, LA Hess, EV Timpano, et al. :Physiologic changes in the foot during pregnancy. .JAPMA 75::297. ,1985. .
-
30.
Jelen, K, Z Tetkova, L Halounova, et al. :Shape characteristics of the foot arch: dynamics in the pregnancy period. .Neuro Endocrinol Lett 26::752. ,2005. .
-
31.
Gutiérrez Navarro, S, B Blanco Núnez, B Aganzo Fraguas, et al. :El pie de la embarazada: seguimiento podológico durante el periodo gestacional. .Podol Clín 11::50. ,2010. .
-
32.
Dragoo, JL, RS Lee, P Benhaim, et al. :Relaxin receptors in the human female anterior cruciate ligament. .Am J Sports Med 31::577. ,2003. .
-
33.
Galey, S, EM Konieczko, CA Arnold, et al. :Immunohistological detection of relaxin binding to anterior cruciate ligaments. .Orthopedics 26::201. ,2003. .
-
34.
Evans, AM, AW Copper, RW Scharfbillig, et al. :Reliability of the foot posture index and traditional measures of foot position. .JAPMA 93::203. ,2003. .
-
35.
Aurichio, TR, JR Rebelatto, and AP de Castro. :The relationship between the body mass index (BMI) and foot posture in elderly people. .Arch Gerontol Geriatr 52.:e89.,2011. .
-
36.
Irving, DB, JL Cook, MA Young, et al. :Obesity and pronated foot type may increase the risk of chronic plantar heel pain: a matched case-control study. .BMC Musculoskelet Disord 8::41. ,2007. .
-
37.
Bewyer, KJ, DC Bewyer, D Messenger, et al. :Pilot data: association between gluteus medius weakness and low back pain during pregnancy. .Iowa Orthop J 29::97. ,2009. .
Anthropometric Foot Changes During Pregnancy
A Pilot Study
Search for other papers by Gabriel A. Gijon-Nogueron in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Marta Gavilan-Diaz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Virginia Valle-Funes in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ana Maria Jimenez-Cebrian in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jose Antonio Cervera-Marin in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jose Miguel Morales-Asencio in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background:
Women’s feet change during pregnancy owing to hormonal and anatomical changes, thus having a strong influence on the decrease in their quality of life during pregnancy. This preliminary study aimed to value the anthropometric and positional changes that affect their feet.
Methods:
Ten pregnant women were measured during their gestational period to analyze the anthropometric changes in their feet from the 12th week of pregnancy. We examined the changes that occured in foot length, forefoot width, arch of the foot height, and the fixed position of the foot by using the Foot Posture Index, and we analyzed three intervals corresponding to pregnancy weeks 12, 24, and 34.
Results:
The most significant finding, with a reliability rate of 95%, is the decrease in internal arch height, which descends 0.65 mm (0.0394 inches) on average at the final stage of the pregnancy period. This change happened in 18 of the feet analyzed, tending toward pronation according to the measure provided by the Foot Posture Index, with a change of 3.78 points on this scale.
Conclusions:
The foot of the pregnant woman tends to flatten during gestational weeks 12 to 34, taking a more pronated posture, and the anthropometric changes in late pregnancy result in increases in foot length and forefoot width, changes that seem to be moderate. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 103(4): 314–321, 2013)
advertising
