Cavanagh PR, Lafortune ML: Ground reaction forces in distance running. .J Biomech 13::397. ,1980. .
Cowan DN, Jones BH, Robinson JR: Foot morphologic characteristics and risk of exercise-related injury. .Arch Fam Med 2::773. ,1993. .
Kaufman KR, Brodine SK, Shaffer RA, et al: The effect of foot structure and range of motion on musculoskeletal overuse injuries. .Am J Sports Med 27::585. ,1999. .
Cowan DN, Robinson JR, Jones BH, et al: Consistency of visual assessment of arch height among clinicians. .Foot Ank Int 15::213. ,1994. .
Cavanagh PR, Rodgers MM: The arch index: a useful measure from footprints. .J Biomech 20::547. ,1987. .
Chu WC, Lee SH, Chu W, et al: The use of arch index to characterize arch height: a digital image processing approach. .IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 42::1088. ,1995. .
Giladi M, Milgrom C, Stein M, et al: The low arch, a protective factor in stress fractures. .Orthop Rev 14::709. ,1985. .
Cavanagh PR, Morag E, Boulton AJM, et al: The relationship of static foot structure to dynamic foot function. .J Biomech 14::243. ,1997. .
Nawoczenski DA, Saltzman CL, Cook TM: The effect of foot structure on the three-dimensional kinematic coupling behavior of the leg and rear foot. .Phys Ther 78::404. ,1998. .
Williams DS, McClay IS: Measurements used to characterize the foot and the medial longitudinal arch: reliability and validity. .Phys Ther 80::864. ,2000. .
Richards CJ, Card K, Song J, et al: “A Novel Arch Height Index Measurement System (AHIMS): Intra- and Interrater Reliability,” in Book of Abstracts, Toledo, Ohio; The Annual Meeting of the American Society of Biomechanics; September. 2003. .
Wunderlich RE, Cavanagh PR: Gender differences in adult foot shape: implications for shoe design. .Med Sci Sports Exerc 33::605. ,2001. .
Saltzman CL, Nowaczenski DA, Talbot KD: Measurement of the medial longitudinal arch. .Arch Phys Med Rehabil 76::45. ,1995. .
Background: The purposes of this study were 1) to determine the intrarater and interrater reliability of the arch height index measurement system device, 2) to establish population normative values for the arch height index in recreational runners, and 3) to compare arch height index values between the right and left feet and between genders.
Methods: Eleven subjects were used to establish intrarater and interrater reliability of the arch height index measurement system. This system was then used to measure the arch height index of 100 recreational runners.
Results: Measurements taken with the arch height index measurement system device exhibited high intrarater and interrater reliability. The mean ± SD arch height index of the recreational runners was 0.340 ± 0.030. Men had larger feet than women, but the arch height index between genders was similar.
Conclusions: The arch height index measurement system device is reliable to use between testers while simplifying the measurement procedure for recording the arch height index. The arch height index may be helpful in identifying potential structural factors that predispose individuals to lower-extremity injuries. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 98(2): 102–106, 2008)