advertising
-
1
Diamond LS, Lynne D, Sigman B: Orthopedic disorders in patients with Down's syndrome. Orthop Clin North Am 12: 57, 1981.
-
2
Camasta CA: Hallux limitus and hallux rigidus: clinical examination, radiographic findings, and natural history. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 13: 423, 1996.
-
3
Antrobus JN: The primary deformity in hallux valgus and metatarsus primus varus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 184: 251, 1984.
-
4
Concolino D, Pasquzzi A, Capalbo G, et al: Early detection of podiatric anomalies in children with Down syndrome. Acta Paediatr 95: 17, 2006.
-
5
Fascione JM, Crews RT, Wrobel JS: Dynamic footprint measurement collection technique and intrarater reliability: ink mat, paper pedography, and electronic pedography. JAPMA 102: 130, 2012.
-
6
Cobb SC, James CR, Hjertstedt M, et al: A digital photographic measurement method for quantifying foot posture: validity, reliability, and descriptive data. J Athl Train 46: 20, 2011.
-
7
Mall NA, Hardaker WM, Nunley JA, et al: The reliability and reproducibility of foot type measurements using a mirrored foot photo box and digital photography compared to caliper measurements. J Biomech 40: 1171, 2007.
-
8
Papuga MO, Burke JR: The reliability of the Associate Platinum digital foot scanner in measuring previously developed footprint characteristics: a technical note. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 34: 114, 2011.
-
9
Forriol Campos F, Maiques JP, Dankloff C, et al: Foot morphology development with age. Gegenbaurs Morphol Jahrb 136: 669, 1990.
-
10
Moreno de la Fuente JL, Catena Toledano M: Podología General y Biomecánica, Masson, Barcelona, 2003.
-
11
Stahelli L, Chew D, Corbett M: The longitudinal arch: a survey of eight hundred and eighty-two feet in normal children and adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69: 426, 1997.
-
12
Gutiérrez-Vilahú L, Massó-Ortigosa N, Rey-Abella F, et al: Reliability and validity of the footprint assessment method using Photoshop CS5 software. JAPMA 105: 226, 2015.
-
13
Yalçin N, Esen E, Kanatli U, et al: Evaluation of the medial longitudinal arch: a comparison between the dynamic plantar pressure measurement system and radiographic analysis. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 44: 241, 2010.
-
14
Williams DS, McClay IS: Measurements used to characterize the foot and the medial longitudinal arch: reliability and validity. Phys Ther 80: 864, 2000.
-
15
Villarroya MA, Esquivel JM, Tomás C, et al: Assessment of the medial longitudinal arch in children and adolescents with obesity: footprints and radiographic study. Eur J Pediatr 168: 559, 2009.
-
16
Saltzman CL, Nawoczenski DA, Talbot KD: Measurement of the medial longitudinal arch. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 76: 45, 1995.
-
17
Queen RM, Mall NA, Hardaker WM, et al: Describing the medial longitudinal arch using footprint indices and a clinical grading system. Foot Ankle Int 28: 456, 2007.
-
18
Onodera AN, Sacco ICN, Morioka EH, et al: What is the best method for child longitudinal plantar arch assessment and when does arch maturation occur? Foot (Edinb) 18: 142, 2008.
-
19
Menz HB, Munteanu SE: Validity of 3 clinical techniques for the measurement of static foot posture in older people. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 36: 179, 2006.
-
20
Mathieson I, Upton D, Prior TD: Examining the validity of selected measures of foot type: a preliminary study. JAPMA 94: 275, 2004.
-
21
Chen C-H, Huang M-H, Chen T-W, et al: The correlation between selected measurements from footprint and radiograph of flatfoot. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 87: 235, 2006.
-
22
Coughlin MJ, Kaz A: Correlation of Harris mats, physical exam, pictures, and radiographic measurements in adult flatfoot deformity. Foot Ankle Int 30: 604, 2009.
-
23
Girona Chenoll G, Cuello Villaverde E: Alteraciones ortopédicas en el Síndrome de Down. Rehabilitación 36: 143, 2002.
-
24
Miller P, Kuo K, Lubicky JP: Clubfoot deformity in Down's syndrome. Orthopedics 18: 449, 1995.
-
25
Pau M, Galli M, Crivellini M, et al: Foot-ground interaction during upright standing in children with Down syndrome. Res Dev Disabil 33: 1881, 2012.
-
26
Mik G, Gholve PA, Scher DM, et al: Down syndrome: orthopedic issues. Curr Opin Pediatr 20: 30, 2008.
-
27
Vázquez Castilla ML , Rodríguez Martínez A, Arroyo Rodríguez Navas AR, et al: Desalineaciones de los miembros inferiores en niños con síndrome de Down. Fisioterapia 34: 140, 2012.
-
28
Nikolaidou ME, Boudolos KD: A footprint-based approach for the rational classification of foot types in young schoolchildren. Foot 16: 82, 2006.
-
29
Bordin D, De Giorgi G, Mazzocco G, et al: Flat and cavus foot, indexes of obesity and overweight in a population of primary-school children. Minerva Pediatr 53: 7, 2001.
-
30
Chen K-C, Yeh C-J, Kuo J-F, et al: Footprint analysis of flatfoot in preschool-aged children. Eur J Pediatr 170: 611, 2011.
-
31
El O, Akcali O, Kosay C, et al: Flexible flatfoot and related factors in primary school children: a report of a screening study. Rheumatol Int 26: 1050, 2006.
-
32
Laguna Nieto M , Alegre LM, Aznar Lain S, et al: ¿Afecta el sobrepeso a la huella plantar y al equilibrio de niños en edad escolar? Apunt Med l'Esport 45: 9, 2010.
-
33
Departament de Benestar Social i Familia: Generalitat de Catalunya. Graus de la situació de discapacitat [Internet], 2009. Available at: http://treballiaferssocials.gencat.cat/ca/ambits_tematics/persones_amb_discapacitat/que_es_i_com_es_reconeix_la_situacio_de_discapacitat/graus_discapacitat/. Accessed March 30, 2016.
-
34
Sociedad Española para el Estudio de la Obesidad: SEEDO'2000 consensus for the evaluation of overweight and obesity and the establishment of criteria for therapeutic intervention [in Spanish]. Med Clin (Barc) 115: 587, 2000.
-
35
Cabañas Armesilla MD, Esparza Ros F: Compendio de Cineantropometría, CTO Editorial, Madrid, 2009.
-
36
Melville CA, Cooper SA, McGrother CW, et al: Obesity in adults with Down syndrome: a case-control study. J Intellect Disabil Res 49: 125, 2005.
-
37
Harichaux P, Medelli J : Pruebas de Aptitud Física y Tests de Esfuerzo Evaluación Científica de la Aptitud Física: Rendimiento Deportivo (Inde), INDE Publicaciones, Barcelona, 2006.
-
38
Hurley WL, Denegar CR, Hertel J : Research Methods: A Framework for Evidence-Based Clinical Practice, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, a Wolters Kluwer business, Philadelphia, 2011.
-
39
Doménech Massons JM: Medida del Cambio: Análisis de Diseños con Medidas Intrasujeto: Fundamentos de Diseño y Estadística, Signo, Barcelona, 2000.
Reliability and Validity of the Footprint Assessment Method Using Photoshop CS5 Software in Young People with Down Syndrome
Search for other papers by Lourdes Gutiérrez-Vilahú in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Núria Massó-Ortigosa in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ferran Rey-Abella in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Lluís Costa-Tutusaus in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Myriam Guerra-Balic in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background: People with Down syndrome present skeletal abnormalities in their feet that can be analyzed by commonly used gold standard indices (the Hernández-Corvo index, the Chippaux-Smirak index, the Staheli arch index, and the Clarke angle) based on footprint measurements. The use of Photoshop CS5 software (Adobe Systems Software Ireland Ltd, Dublin, Ireland) to measure footprints has been validated in the general population. The present study aimed to assess the reliability and validity of this footprint assessment technique in the population with Down syndrome.
Methods: Using optical podography and photography, 44 footprints from 22 patients with Down syndrome (11 men [mean ± SD age, 23.82 ± 3.12 years] and 11 women [mean ± SD age, 24.82 ± 6.81 years]) were recorded in a static bipedal standing position. A blinded observer performed the measurements using a validated manual method three times during the 4-month study, with 2 months between measurements. Test-retest was used to check the reliability of the Photoshop CS5 software measurements. Validity and reliability were obtained by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
Results: The reliability test for all of the indices showed very good values for the Photoshop CS5 method (ICC, 0.982–0.995). Validity testing also found no differences between the techniques (ICC, 0.988–0.999).
Conclusions: The Photoshop CS5 software method is reliable and valid for the study of footprints in young people with Down syndrome.
advertising
advertising
