• 1

    Dominguez G, Munuera PV, La fuente G, et al: Revisión bibliográfica de los métodos de medición de la protusión metatarsal. .Rev Esp Podol 16::72. ,2005. .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Morton DJ: Structural factors in static disorders of the foot. .Am J Surg 9::315. ,1930. .

  • 3

    Harris RI, Beath T: Report 15th Army Foot Survey, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa. ,1947. .

  • 4

    Harris RI, Beath T: The short first metatarsal. .J Bone Joint Surg Am 31::553. ,1949. .

  • 5

    Hardy RH, Clapham JCR: Observations on hallux valgus. .J Bone Joint Surg Br 33::376. ,1951. .

  • 6

    LaPorta G, Melillo T, Olinsky D: X-ray evaluation of hallux abducto valgus deformity. .JAPA 64::544. ,1974. .

  • 7

    Valley BA, Reese HW: Guidelines for reconstructing the metatarsal parabola with the shortening osteotomy. .JAPMA 81::406. ,1991. .

  • 8

    Oller A: Biomecánica del pie. .Rev Esp Podol 5::17. ,1994. .

  • 9

    Munuera Martinez PV, Lafuente Sotillos G, Dominguez Maldonado G, et al: Morphofunctional study of brachymetatarsia of the fourth metatarsal. .JAPMA 94::347. ,2004. .

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Palladino SJ: “Preoperative Evaluation of the Bunion Patient: Etiology, Biomechanics, Clinical and Radiographic Assessment,” in Textbook of Bunion Surgery, 2nd Ed, ed by J Gerbert, p 1, Futura Publishing Co, New York. ,1991. .

  • 11

    Vito G, Kalish S: “Biomechanical Radiographic Evaluation,” in The Biomechanics of the Foot and Ankle, 2nd Ed, ed by RA Donatelli, p 137, FA Davis Co, Philadelphia. ,1996. .

  • 12

    Gentili A, Masih S, Yao L, et al: Pictorial review: foot axes and angles. .Br J Radiol 69::968. ,1996. .

  • 13

    LaPorta DM, Melillo TV, Heterington VJ: “Preoperative Assessment in Hallux Valgus,” in Hallux Valgus and Forefoot Surgery, ed by JH Hetherington, p 107, Churchill Livingstone, New York. ,1994. .

  • 14

    Coughlin MJ, Saltzman CL, Nunley JA: Angular measurement in the evaluation of hallux valgus deformities: a report of the Ad Hoc Committee of the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society on Angular Measurements. .Foot Ankle Int 23::68. ,2002. .

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Testud L, Latarjet A: Tratado de Anatomía Humana, 9th Ed, Salvat Editores SA, Barcelona. ,1988. .

  • 16

    Steele DG: The estimation of sex on the basis of the talus and calcaneus. .Am J Phys Anthropol 45::581. ,1976. .

  • 17

    Smith SL: Attribution of foot bones to sex and population groups. .J Forensic Sci 42::186. ,1997. .

  • 18

    Kapandji AI: Fisiología Articular: Miembro Inferior, 5th Ed, Editorial Médica Panamericana, Madrid. ,1999. .

  • 19

    Palastanga N, Field D, Soames R: Anatomy and Human Movement, 4th Ed, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford. ,2002. .

  • 20

    Miralles RC, Miralles I, Puig M: “Rodilla,” in Biomecánica Clínica de los Tejidos y las Articulaciones del Aparato Locomotor, 2nd Ed, ed by RC Miralles, I Miralles, p 233, Masson, Barcelona. ,2005. .

  • 21

    Solano A, Brill W, Tey M, et al: “Normoalineación de las Extremidades Inferiores en el Adulto,” in Desalineaciones Torsionales de las Extremidades Inferiores. Implicaciones Clinicopatológicas, Monografías SECOT 2, ed by J Ballester, p 11, Masson, Barcelona. ,2001. .

  • 22

    Braten M, Terjesen T, Rossvoll I: Femoral anteversion in normal adults: ultrasound measurements in 50 men and 50 women. .Acta Orthop Scand 63::29. ,1992. .

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Brouwer KJ, Molenaar JC, Van Ling B: Rotational deformities after femoral shaft fractures in childhood: a retrospective study 27–32 years after the accident. .Acta Orthop Scand 52::81. ,1981. .

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Ferrari J, Hopkinson DA, Linney AD: Size and shape differences between male and female foot bones: is the female foot predisposed to hallux abducto valgus deformity? JAPMA 94: 434. ,2004. .

    • Crossref
    • Export Citation

Metatarsal Protrusion Angle

Values of Normality

Gabriel Domínguez Lic Pod, PhD1, Pedro V. Munuera Lic Pod, PhD1, and Mercedes Lomas MD, PhD2
View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Podiatrics, University of Seville, Seville, Spain.
  • | 2 Department of Nursing, University of Seville, Seville, Spain.
Restricted access

Background: We performed an adaptation of the system of evaluation of metatarsal protrusion described by Oller in 1994 to study the metatarsal parabola group.

Methods: The system of measurement was applied to the five metatarsals of 169 normal feet (72 feet of women and 97 feet of men) according to the inclusion criteria established.

Results: The mean ± SD metatarsal protrusion angle with respect to the second ray in women was 87.49° ± 5.48° for metatarsal I, 70.00° ± 5.74° for metatarsal III, 63.47° ± 4.17° for metatarsal IV, and 56.38° ± 3.27° for metatarsal V. In men, the values were 85.30° ± 6.75° for metatarsal I, 68.00° ± 6.72° for metatarsal III, 60.56° ± 4.61° for metatarsal IV, and 54.13° ± 3.75° for metatarsal V. The comparative analysis between women and men showed significant differences (P < .05) for all of the values of metatarsal protrusion.

Conclusions: The comparative analysis between women and men indicates a possible difference between the anthropometric values of these variables in humans, suggesting a possible repercussion on the biomechanical patterns by sex. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 99(1): 49–53, 2009)

Corresponding author: Gabriel Domínguez, PhD, Departamento de Podología, Centro Docente de Fisioterapia y Podología, C/Avicena, s/n 41009 Sevilla, Spain. (E-mail: gdominguez@us.es)