Search Results
You are looking at 1 - 2 of 2 items for
- Author or Editor: Malcolm D. C. Donaldson x
- Refine by access: All Content x
Anthropometric Foot Structure of Peripubescent Children with Excessive versus Normal Body Mass
A Cross-sectional Study
Background: A variety of musculoskeletal problems have been associated with excessive body mass in children, including structural foot problems.
Methods: Two hundred children aged 9 to 12 years were recruited to evaluate the effect of body mass on foot structure. Three reliable anthropometric measures were recorded: foot length, forefoot width, and navicular height.
Results: Following independent sample t test analysis of the data, significant differences were found for the three anthropometric variables when children with normal body mass were compared with those with excessive body mass. The research indicates that foot length and width increase with body mass, whereas navicular height drops.
Conclusions: Excessive body mass affects the discrete anthropometric structure of the peripubescent foot. With the growing concern about childhood obesity, further research is essential to develop a comprehensive understanding of the issues identified and to quantify the findings presented here. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 97(5): 366–370, 2007)
Background: The establishment of growth reference values is needed in pediatric practice where pathologic conditions can have a detrimental effect on the growth and development of the pediatric foot. This study aims to use multiple regression to evaluate the effects of multiple predictor variables (height, age, body mass, and gender) on anthropometric characteristics of the peripubescent foot.
Methods: Two hundred children aged 9 to 12 years were recruited, and three anthropometric measurements of the pediatric foot were recorded (foot length, forefoot width, and navicular height).
Results: Multiple regression analysis was conducted, and coefficients for gender, height, and body mass all had significant relationships for the prediction of forefoot width and foot length (P = .05, r = 0.7). The coefficients for gender and body mass were not significant for the prediction of navicular height (P = .05), whereas height was (P = .05).
Conclusions: Normative growth reference values and prognostic regression equations are presented for the peripubescent foot. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 99(6): 497–502, 2009)
