• 1. 

    Sutherland JM, Mok J & Liu G: Cost-utility study of the economics of bunion correction surgery. Foot Ankle Int 40: 336, 2019.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2. 

    Sutherland JM, Wing K & Penner M: Quantifying patient-reported disability and health while waiting for bunion surgery. Foot Ankle Int 39: 1047, 2018.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3. 

    Coughlin MJ & Jones CP: Hallux valgus: demographics, etiology, and radiographic assessment. Foot Ankle Int 28: 759, 2007.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4. 

    Menz HB & Lord SR: Gait instability in older people with hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Int 26: 483, 2005.

  • 5. 

    Everhart JS: Hallux valgus correction: the best technique is still up for debate: commentary on an article by Alexej Barg, MD, et al: ‘Unfavorable outcomes following surgical treatment of hallux valgus deformity. A systematic literature review.' J Bone Joint Surg Am 100: e124, 2018.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6. 

    Lee SY, Chung CY & Park MS: Radiographic measurements associated with the natural progression of the hallux valgus during at least 2 years of follow-up. Foot Ankle Int 39: 463, 2018.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7. 

    Ortiz C, Wagner P & Vela O et al.: “Angle to be corrected” in preoperative evaluation for hallux valgus surgery. Foot Ankle Int 37: 172, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8. 

    Heineman N, Xi Y & Zhang L: Hallux valgus evaluation on MRI: can measurements validated on radiographs be used? J Foot Ankle Surg 57: 305, 2018.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. 

    Nix S, Russell T & Vicenzino B et al.: Validity and reliability of hallux valgus angle measured on digital photographs. J Orthop Sport Phys Ther 42: 642, 2012.

    • Crossref
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. 

    Garrow AP, Papageorgiou A & Silman AJ et al.: The grading of hallux valgus: the Manchester Scale. JAPMA 91: 74, 2001.

  • 11. 

    Menz HB & Munteanu SE: Radiographic validation of the Manchester scale for the classification of hallux valgus deformity. Rheumatology 44: 1061, 2005.

  • 12. 

    Menz HB, Fotoohabadi MR & Wee E et al.: Validity of self-assessment of hallux valgus using the Manchester scale. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 11: 215, 2010.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13. 

    Klein C, Kinz W & Zembsch A et al.: The hallux valgus angle of the margo medialis pedis as an alternative to the measurement of the metatarsophalangeal hallux valgus angle. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 15: 133, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14. 

    Yamaguchi S, Sadamasu A & Kimura S et al.: Nonradiographic measurement of hallux valgus angle using self-photography. J Orthop Sports PhysTher 49: 80, 2019.

  • 15. 

    Shah A, Rowlands M & Patel A et al.: Ubersense: using a free video analysis app to evaluate and improve microsurgical skills. Plast Reconstr Surg 134: 338e, 2014.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. 

    Weiler R: Übersense coach app for sport medicine? slow motion video analysis (mobile app user guide). Br J Sports Med 50: 255, 2016.

  • 17. 

    Faber FWM, Kleinrensink GJ & Mulder PGH et al.: Mobility of the first tarsometatarsal joint in hallux valgus patients: a radiographic analysis. Foot Ankle Int 22: 965, 2001.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18. 

    Nix S, Smith M & Vicenzino B: Prevalence of hallux valgus in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Foot Ankle Res 3: 21, 2010.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19. 

    Haley SM & Fragala-Pinkham MA: Interpreting change scores of tests and measures used in physical therapy. Phys Ther 86: 735, 2006.

  • 20. 

    Singh G: Determination of cutoff score for a diagnostic test. Internet J Lab Med 2: 4, 2006.

  • 21. 

    Nixon DC, McCormick JJ & Johnson JE et al.: PROMIS pain interference and physical function scores correlate with the foot and ankle ability measure (FAAM) in patients with hallux valgus. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475: 2775, 2017.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

A Clinician-Free Method Using Top-View Photography for Screening and Monitoring Hallux Valgus

View More View Less
Restricted access

Background

Hallux valgus is a progressive foot deformity that commonly affects middle-aged women. The aim of this study was to develop a novel method using only top-view photographs to assess hallux valgus severity.

Methods

A top-view digital photograph was taken of each foot of 70 female participants. Two straight lines were drawn along the medial edge of the great toe and forefoot, and the included angle (termed bunion angle) was measured using a free software program. Each foot was also assessed by a clinician using the Manchester scale as no (grade 1), mild (grade 2), moderate (grade 3), or severe (grade 4) deformity.

Results

The mean bunion angles of the 140 feet were 6.7°, 13.5°, and 16.2° for Manchester grades 1, 2, and 3, respectively (no foot was in grade 4). The reliability was excellent for both intrarater (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.93–0.95) and interrater (ICC = 0.90) assessments. Receiver operating characteristic curves determined the optimal bunion angle cutoff value for screening hallux valgus to be 9°, which gives 89.2% sensitivity and 74.2% specificity.

Conclusions

The bunion angle is a reliable, clinician-free method that can potentially be integrated into a smartphone app for easy and inexpensive self-assessment of hallux valgus.

National Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, School of Sport, Exercise and Health Sciences, Loughborough University, Loughborough, United Kingdom.

Podiatry Department, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore.

School of Health Sciences, University of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia.

Physical Education and Sports Science Academic Group, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Private practice podiatric physician, Singapore.

Corresponding author: Pui Wah Kong, PhD, Physical Education and Sports Science Academic Group, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore 637616, Singapore. (E-mail: puiwah.kong@nie.edu.sg)

Conflict of Interest: None reported.