advertising
-
1.
Lee MS, Vanore JV, Thomas JL, et al: Diagnosis and treatment of adult flatfoot. J Foot Ankle Surg 4: 78, 2005.
-
2.
Banwell HA, Mackintosh S, Thewlis D: Foot orthoses for adults with flexible pes planus: a systematic review. J Foot Ankle Res 7: 23, 2014.
-
3.
Chen Y-C, Lou S-Z, Huang C-Y, et al: Effects of foot orthoses on gait patterns of flat feet patients. Clin Biomech 25: 265, 2010.
-
4.
Desmyttere G, Hajizadeh M, Bleau J, et al: Anti-pronator components are essential to effectively alter lower-limb kinematics and kinetics in individuals with flexible flatfeet. Clin Biomech 86: 105390, 2021.
-
5.
Murley GS, Menz HB, Landorf KB: Foot posture influences the electromyographic activity of selected lower limb muscles during gait. J Foot Ankle Res 2: 1, 2009.
-
6.
Hunt AE, Smith RM: Mechanics and control of the flat versus normal foot during the stance phase of walking. Clin Biomech 19: 391, 2004.
-
7.
Farmani F, Sadeghi M, Saeedi H, et al: The effect of foot orthoses on energy consumption in runners with flat foot. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther 5: 60, 2011.
-
8.
Burns J, Crosbie J, Hunt A, et al: The effect of pes cavus on foot pain and plantar pressure. Clin Biomech 20: 877, 2005.
-
9.
Buldt AK, Levinger P, Murley GS, et al: Foot posture is associated with kinematics of the foot during gait: a comparison of normal, planus and cavus feet. Gait Posture 42: 42, 2015.
-
10.
Waters RL, Mulroy S: The energy expenditure of normal and pathologic gait. Gait Posture 9: 207, 1999.
-
11.
Karimi MT, Fereshtehnejad N, Pool F: The impact of foot insole on the energy consumption of flat-footed individuals during walking. Foot Ankle Spec 6: 21, 2012.
-
12.
Otman S, Basgoze O, Gökçe Kutsal Y: Energy cost of walking with flat feet. Prosthet Orthot Int 12: 73, 1988.
-
13.
Dhyani M, Singla D, Ahmad I, et al: Effect of rocker soled shoe design on walking economy in females with pes planus. J Clin Diagn Res 11: YC01, 2017.
-
14.
Zuil-Escobar JC, Martínez-Cepa CB, Martín-Urrialde JA, et al: Medial longitudinal arch: accuracy, reliability, and correlation between navicular drop test and footprint parameters. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 41: 672, 2018.
-
15.
Redmond AC, Crosbie J, Ouvrier RA: Development and validation of a novel rating system for scoring standing foot posture: the Foot Posture Index. Clin Biomech 21: 89, 2006.
-
16.
Jack EA: Naviculo-cuneiform fusion in the treatment of flat foot. J Bone Joint Surg Br 35-B: 75, 1953.
-
17.
Thomas S, Reading J, Shephard RJ: Revision of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire (PAR-Q). Can J Sport Sci 17: 338, 1992.
-
18.
Nordsiden L, Van Lunen BL, Walker ML, et al: The effect of 3 foot pads on plantar pressure of pes planus foot type. J Sport Rehabil 19: 71, 2010.
-
19.
Budiman-Mak E, Conrad K, Roach K: The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol 44: 561, 1991.
-
20.
Göksel Karatepe A, GünaydIn R, Kaya T, et al: Validation of the Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score. Rheumatol Int 30: 169, 2009.
-
21.
Dal U, Cimen OB, Incel NA, et al: Fibromyalgia syndrome patients optimize the oxygen cost of walking by preferring a lower walking speed. J Musculoskelet Pain 19: 212, 2011.
-
22.
Dag F, Dal U, Altinkaya Z, et al: Alterations in energy consumption and plantar pressure distribution during walking in young adults with patellofemoral pain syndrome. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 53: 50, 2019.
-
23.
Özyener F, Rossiter HB, Ward SA, et al: Influence of exercise intensity on the on- and off- transient kinetics of pulmonary oxygen uptake in humans. J Physiol 533: 891, 2001.
-
24.
De Mendonça GV, Pereira FD: Between-day variability of net and gross oxygen uptake during graded treadmill walking: effects of different walking intensities on the reliability of locomotion economy. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 33: 1199, 2008.
-
25.
Jeng B, Cederberg KLJ, Lai B, et al: Oxygen cost of over-ground walking in persons with mild-to-moderate Parkinson’s disease. Gait Posture 82: 1, 2020.
-
26.
Borg GA: Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports Exerc 14: 377, 1982.
-
27.
Twomey DM, Mcintosh AS: The effects of low arched feet on lower limb gait kinematics in children. Foot 22: 60, 2012.
-
28.
Lin CJ, Lai KA, Kuan TS, et al: Correlating factors and clinical significance of flexible flatfoot in preschool children. J Pediatr Orthop 21: 378, 2001.
-
29.
Buldt AK, Murley GS, Butterworth P, et al: The relationship between foot posture and lower limb kinematics during walking: a systematic review. Gait Posture 38: 363, 2013.
-
30.
Hunt AE, Fahey AJ, Smith RM: Static measures of calcaneal deviation and arch angle as predictors of rearfoot motion during walking. Aust J Physiother 46: 9, 2000.
-
31.
Simkin A, Leichter I, Giladi M, et al: Combined effect of foot arch structure and an orthotic device on stress fractures. Foot Ankle 10: 25, 1989.
Walking Economy in Individuals with Pes Planus
Search for other papers by Figen Dağ in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Orhan Güvener in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Özlem Bölgen Çimen in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background: Biomechanical changes in individuals with pes planus may lead to unusual gait and increased muscle activity. This study aimed to investigate and compare walking oxygen consumption in individuals with pes planus and control participants.
Methods: The study included 60 individuals (18–33 years old): 30 in the pes planus group (21 females) and 30 in the normal arch group (23 females) based on the navicular drop test and the Foot Posture Index. Individuals walked on a treadmill for 7 min at preferred walking speed and 30% above preferred walking speed, and oxygen consumption was measured through walking trials with an indirect calorimeter. The Borg scale was applied to determine perceived exertion during both walking trials. The Foot Function Index (FFI) and the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) were used to evaluate the clinical/functional status of the individuals with pes planus.
Results: There were no significant differences in preferred walking speed and oxygen consumption parameters for both walking trials between groups (P > .05). The median (range) FFI score of the individuals with pes planus was 9.13 (0–44.35) for the right foot and 8.70 (0–40.87) for the left foot. Perceived exertion rates of both walking trials were not significantly different between groups (P > .05). The median total FAOS score of the participants with pes planus was 94 (range, 65–99). There were no relationships between oxygen consumption and FAOS and FFI scores (P > .05).
Conclusions: No differences in walking speed and walking economy parameters were observed between individuals with pes planus and control participants.
advertising
