Advertisement
- Methods
- Results
- Discussion
- Conclusion
- Appendix 1: Definitions of Selected Parameters
- Foot Length (heel-to-toe length) (LHT)—
- Ball Length (LB)—
- Medial Ball Reach (DBM)—
- Lateral Ball Reach (DBL)—
- Second Metatarsal Head Reach (DMTH2)—
- Ball Width (WB)—
- Ball Circumference (CB)—
- Ball Angle (ΘB)—
- Instep Height (HIn)—
- Instep Width (WIn)—
- Instep Circumference (CIn)—
- Span Circumference (CSpan)—
- Medial Malleolus Height (HMM)—
- Lateral Malleolus Height (HML)—
- Maximal Heel Width (WHmax)—
- Proximal Heel Width (WHprox)—
- Arch Reach (LArch)—
- Arch Radius (HArch)—
- Longitudinal Arch Length (LArchLen)—
- Transverse Arch Width (WArch)—
- Toe Region Length (LToe)—
- Toe Region Height (HToe)—
- References
-
1
Sarrafian SK: Anatomy of the Foot and Ankle: Descriptive, Topographic, Functional, 2nd Ed, JB Lippincott, Philadelphia. ,1993. .
-
2
Lundberg A, Goldie I, Kalin B, et al: Kinematics of the ankle/foot complex: plantarflexion and dorsiflexion. .Foot Ankle 9::194. ,1989. .
-
3
Lundberg A, Svensson O, Bylund C, et al: Kinematics of the ankle/foot complex, part 2: pronation and supination. .Foot Ankle 9::248. ,1989. .
-
4
Lundberg A, Svensson O, Bylund C, et al: Kinematics of the ankle/foot complex, part 3: influence of leg rotation. .Foot Ankle 9::304. ,1989. .
-
5
Inman VT: The Joints of the Foot and Ankle, Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore. ,1976. .
-
6
Houston VL, Luo GM, Mason CP, et al: “FEA Optimization of Pedorthic Treatment for Podalgia,” in ASME Advances in Bioengineering, Vol 51, p 191, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York. ,2001. .
-
7
Janisse DJ: Prescription footwear for arthritis of the foot and ankle. .Clin Orthop Relat Res 349::100. ,1998. .
-
8
Janisse DJ: “Pedorthic Care of the Diabetic Foot,” in The Diabetic Foot, 5th Ed, ed by ME Levin, LW O’Neal, JH Bowker, p 549, CV Mosby, St Louis. ,1993. .
-
9
Coleman WC: “Footwear in a Management Program of Injury Prevention,” in The Diabetic Foot, 5th Ed, ed by ME Levin, LW O’Neal, JH Bowker, p 293, CV Mosby, St Louis. ,1993. .
-
10
Chantelau E: Therapeutic footwear in patients with diabetes. .JAMA 288::1231. ,2002. .
-
11
Fernando DJ, Masson EA, Veves A, et al: Relationship of limited joint mobility to abnormal foot pressures and diabetic foot ulceration. .Diabetes Care 14::8. ,1991. .
-
12
Brand PW: “Repetitive Stress in the Development of Diabetic Foot Ulcers,” in The Diabetic Foot, 4th Ed, ed by ME Levin, LW O’Neal, p 83, CV Mosby, St Louis. ,1988. .
-
13
Riddle DL, Freeman DB: Management of a patient with diagnosis of bilateral plantar fasciitis and Achilles tendonitis. .Phys Ther 68::1913. ,1988. .
-
14
Tovey FI, Moss M: “Specialist Shoes for the Diabetic Foot,” in The Foot in Diabetes, ed by H Connor, AJM Boulton, JD Ward, p 97, John Wiley & Sons, New York. ,1987. .
-
15
Wosk J, Voloshin AS: Low back pain: conservative treatment with artificial shock absorbers. .Arch Phys Med Rehabil 66::145. ,1985. .
-
16
Rosenthal RK: The use of orthotics in foot and ankle problems in cerebral palsy. .Foot Ankle 4::194. ,1984. .
-
17
Moncur C, Shields MN: Clinical management of meta-tarsalgia in the patient with arthritis. .Clin Manage Phys Ther 3::7. ,1983. .
-
18
Gould JS: Conservative management of the hypersensitive foot in rheumatoid arthritis. .Foot Ankle 2::224. ,1982. .
-
19
Staros A, Rubin G, Altobelli A, et al: Prescription of orthopedic footwear. .VAREC Rev 1::3. ,1981. .
-
20
Broadley HM: Management of the foot in rheumatoid arthritis. .Occup Ther 37::4. ,1974. .
-
21
Brand PW: A Study of the Responses of Normal and Denervated Soft Tissues to Repetitive Mechanical Stress (Final Report of HEW SRS Research Project No. RC-40-M), HEW, Washington, DC. ,1970. .
-
22
Houston VL, Luo GM, Mason CP, et al: “Optimization of Pedorthic Insole Designs,” in Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Department of Veterans Affairs Research & Development Meeting, Baltimore, MD, February 10–12, 2002, Department of Veterans Affairs Rehabilitation Research and Development Service, Baltimore. ,2002. .
-
23
Houston VL, Luo G, Mason CP, et al: “FEA Optimization of Pedorthotic Insole Design for Patients with Diabetes Mellitus,” in Proceedings of the 10th World Congress of the ISPO, Glasgow, Scotland, July 1–6, 2001, International Society for Prosthetics and Orthotics, Copenhagen. ,2001. .
-
24
Frey C, Thompson F, Smith J, et al: American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Women’s Shoe Survey. .Foot Ankle 14::78. ,1993. .
-
25
Frey C, Thompson F, Smith J, et al: Update on women’s footwear. .Foot Ankle 16::328. ,1995. .
-
26
Reinker KA, Ozbourne S: A comparison of male and female orthopedic pathology in basic training. .Mil Med 144::532. ,1979. .
-
27
Ross J, Woodward A: Risk factors for injury during basic military training. .J Occup Med 36::1120. ,1994. .
-
28
Kouchi M: Inter-generation differences in foot morphology: aging or secular change?. J Hum Ergol 32::23. ,2003. .
-
29
Nanna I, Pradhan D, Ghosh S, et al: A comparative study of foot dimension between adult males and females and evaluation of foot hazards due to using footwear. .J Physiol Anthropol Appl Hum Sci 20::241. ,2001. .
-
30
Wunderlich RE, Cavanagh PR: Gender differences in adult foot shape: implications for shoe design. .Med Sci Sports Exerc 33::605. ,2001. .
-
31
Cheng JC, Leung SS, Leung AK, et al: Change of foot size with weightbearing: a study of 2829 children 3 to 18 years of age. .Clin Orthop Relat Res 342::123. ,1997. .
-
32
Tsung BY, Zhang M, Fan YB, et al: Quantitative comparison of plantar foot shapes under different weightbearing conditions. .J Rehabil Res Dev 40::517. ,2003. .
-
33
Houston VL, Mason CP, Luo GM, et al: Biomechanical and Optical Digitizer Studies for Enhanced Orthopedic Footwear CAD/CAM (Technical Report DAMD17-00-1-0577), US Army Medical Research & Materiel Command, Ft Detrick, MD, September. 2003. .
-
34
Houston VL, Mason CP, Beattie AC, et al: “The VA-Cyberware Prosthetics–Orthotics–Pedorthics Optical Digitizers,” in CAD/CAM Systems in Pedorthics, Prosthetics & Orthotics, ed by U Boenick, EM Nader, p 133, Verlag Orthopadie-Technik, Berlin. ,1998. .
-
35
Houston VL, Mason CP, Luo GM, et al: “An Overview of the VA Pedorthic CAD/CAM System,” in CAD/CAM Systems in Pedorthics, Prosthetics & Orthotics, ed by U Boenick, EM Nader, p 337, Verlag Orthopadie-Technik, Berlin. ,1998. .
-
36
Parham KR, Gordon CC, Bensel CK: Anthropometry of the Foot and Lower Leg of US Army Soldiers (Technical Report TR 92-028), US Army Natick Research, Development, & Engineering Center, Natick, MA. ,1992. .
-
37
Gordon CC, Bradtmiller B, Clauser CE, et al: 1987–1988 Anthropometric Survey of US Army Personnel: Methods and Summary Statistics (Technical Report TR 89-044), US Army Natick Research, Development, & Engineering Center, Natick, MA. ,1989. .
-
38
Shapiro SS, Wilk MB: An analysis of variance test for normality. .Biometrika 52::591. ,1965. .
-
39
Liu W, Miller J, Stefanyshyn D, et al: Accuracy and reliability of a technique for quantifying foot shape, dimensions, and structural characteristics. .Ergonomics 42::346. ,1999. .
-
40
Chantelau E, Gede A: Foot dimensions of elderly people with and without diabetes mellitus: a data basis for shoe design. .Gerontology 48::241. ,2002. .
Changes in Male Foot Shape and Size with Weightbearing
Accurate, consistent measurement of foot-ankle geometry is essential for the design and manufacture of well-fitting, functional, comfortable footwear; for the diagnosis of certain biomechanical disorders; and for consistent longitudinal monitoring and assessment of pedorthic treatment outcomes. We sought to formulate a basic set of measures characterizing the principal geometric dimensions of the foot, to investigate how these measures vary with increasing weightbearing, and to explore the implications of weightbearing changes in pedal geometry for orthopedic footwear design and manufacture. The right feet of 40 healthy men aged 22 to 71 years were scanned using the Department of Veterans Affairs Pedorthics Optical Digitizer in neutral alignment, sequentially bearing 0%, 10%, 25%, 50%, and 100% of the subjects’ body weight. With support of the full body weight, the following mean changes in the pedal parameters were observed: heel-to-toe length, 1.5%; ball width, 4.3%; maximum heel width, 4.8%; and instep height, –9.3%. On average, 71% of the changes sustained in the pedal parameters at full weightbearing occurred when, or before, 25% of the body weight was applied. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 96(4): 330–343, 2006)
