Reliability and concurrent validity of a novel method allowing for in-shoe measurement of navicular drop

Analysis of windlass mechanism according to one walking cycle

[Purpose] This study aimed to calculate the windlass mechanism in one walking cycle (WC) using the medial longitudinal arch (MLA) height and compare its mechanism with joint moments, angles, and center of gravity movement. [Participants and Methods] The study analyzed the gait of 20 healthy adults (14 males, six females) using a three-dimensional motion analyzer to calculate several parameters. [Results] In the terminal stance, the MLA height reached 20.6 ± 6.0 mm (minimum value) at 49% WC. Simultaneously, the ankle dorsiflexion angle, ankle internal plantarflexion moment, and forward shift of the center of gravity reached the maximum values. At 62% WC, the MLA height was 26.8 ± 4.8 mm and reached maximum during the stance phase, indicating a windlass mechanism. Additionally, the MLA height was 61.7 ± 22.7 mm at 69% WC, indicating an MLA spiking phenomenon. [Conclusion] The MLA height was lowest at 49% WC due to reverse windlass mechanism. Although the windlass mechanism was activated at 62% WC, it was functionally equivalent to the swing phase. Push-off was impossible during the swing phase. At 69% WC, the swing phase showed a second windlass mechanism.

Validity and reproducibility of foot motion analysis using a stretch strain sensor

BACKGROUND

Multi-segment foot analysis is traditionally challenging to perform while subjects are wearing footwear or a foot orthosis and is difficult to apply in the clinical setting. A recently developed stretch strain sensor (STR), that is thin and highly flexible, may solve this limitation because it does not require observation using a camera and is highly portable.

RESEARCH QUESTION

This study aimed to examine the reproducibility and validity of foot motion analysis using the STR during walking and running by comparing it with a conventional motion capture system.

METHODS

Twenty-one healthy participants were examined in this study. The STR was placed on the participant's foot in one of two locations in separate experiments (spring ligament; SL and navicular drop; ND methods). Foot kinematic data during walking and running were simultaneously recorded using the STR and a three-dimensional motion capture system. Intra-class correlation (ICC) was used to assess test-retest reproducibility of the STR method. Cross-correlation coefficient evaluated the similarity of the pattern of the signals between the two systems. Pearson and Spearman correlation analysis was used to evaluate the relationships between the STR measurement and angular excursion of the forefoot or hindfoot.

RESULTS

The ICCs of the SL method were 0.95 and 0.96, and those of the ND method were 0.93 and 0.71 during walking and running, respectively. In the SL method, the pattern of the signals between the STR and forefoot frontal motion was strongly correlated. The STR measurement was significantly correlated with forefoot eversion excursion (walking: r=-0.67, running: r=-0.64, p < 0.01 each). In the ND method, the STR signal was not associated with forefoot and hindfoot kinematics.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our results showed that the STR has acceptable reproducibility and validity of foot motion analysis. This system may enable measurement of foot motion while subjects are wearing shoes and outside the laboratory.

Comfort and Ground Reaction Forces in Flat-Footed Female Runners: Comparison of Low-Dye Taping versus Sham Taping

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of low-Dye tape on comfort and ground reaction forces (GRF) in flat-footed female runners. A randomized cross-over study was conducted on 15 flat-footed female recreational runners. Participants ran at three speeds (9, 10, 11 km/h) under two conditions: low-Dye and sham taping. Comfort level was assessed using a 150-mm visual analog scale. GRF data were collected using an instrumented treadmill. Stance time, peak forces, and loading rates were extracted. Low-Dye taping showed a lower comfort level (low-Dye, 63.8 (24.3) mm, sham 122.0 (16.0) mm, mean difference [95% confident intervals], -58.2 [68.2, 48.2] mm, p < 0.001). For all biomechanical variables, there was no interaction (taping condition a speed) effect or difference between taping conditions. As running speed increased, there was a decrease in stance time (p < 0.001) and increase in loading rate (p = 0.009), impact peak (p = 0.004), active peak (p < .001), breaking peak (p < 0.001), propulsive peak (p < 0.001), medial peak (p < 0.001), and lateral peak (p < 0.001). Compared with sham taping, application of low-Dye taping was less comfortable but did not alter running ground reaction forces among flat-footed female runners.

A minimal markerset for three-dimensional foot function assessment: measuring navicular drop and drift under dynamic conditions

Background

The validity of predicting foot pronation occurring mainly at the midfoot by surrogate measures from the rearfoot, like eversion excursion, is limited. The dynamic navicular mobility in terms of vertical navicular drop (dNDrop) and medial navicular drift (dNDrift) may be regarded as meaningful clinical indicators to represent overall foot function. This study aimed to develop a minimal approach to measure the two parameters and to examine their intra- and interday reliability during walking.

Methods

The minimal markerset uses markers at the lateral and medial caput of the 1^st and 5^th metatarsals, respectively, at the dorsal calcaneus and at the tuberosity of the navicular bone. Dynamic navicular drop and drift were assessed with three-dimensional motion capture in 21 healthy individuals using a single-examiner test-retest study design.

Results

Intra- and interday repeatability were 1.1 mm (ICC₂₁ 0.97) and 2.3 mm (ICC₂₁ 0.87) for dynamic navicular drop and 1.5 mm (ICC₂₁ 0.96) and 5.3 mm (ICC₂₁ 0.46) for dynamic navicular drift. The contribution of instrumental errors was estimated to 0.25 mm for dynamic navicular drop and 0.86 mm for dynamic navicular drift.

Conclusions

Interday reliability was generally worse than intraday reliability primary due to day-to-day variations in movement patterns and the contribution of instrumental errors was below 23% for dynamic navicular drop but reached 57% for dynamic navicular drift. The minimal markerset allows to simply transfer the known concepts of navicular drop and drift from quasi-static clinical test conditions to functional tasks, which is recommended to more closely relate assessments to the functional behavior of the foot.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13047-018-0257-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Can positional MRI predict dynamic changes in the medial plantar arch? An exploratory pilot study

BACKGROUND

Positional MRI (pMRI) allows for three-dimensional visual assessment of navicular position. In this exploratory pilot study pMRI was validated against a stretch sensor device, which measures movement of the medial plantar arch. We hypothesized that a combined pMRI measure incorporating both vertical and medial displacement of the navicular bone induced by loading would be correlated with corresponding stretch sensor measurements.

METHODS

10 voluntary participants were included in the study. Both pMRI and subsequent stretch sensor measurements were performed in a) supine, b) standing and c) standing position with addition of 10 % body weight during static loading of the foot. Stretch sensor measurements were also performed during barefoot walking.

RESULTS

The total change in navicular position measured by pMRI was 10.3 mm (CI: 7.0 to 13.5 mm). No further displacement occurred when adding 10 % bodyweight (mean difference: 0.7 mm (CI: -0.7 to 2.0 mm), P = 0.29). The total navicular displacement correlated with stretch sensor measurement under static loading conditions (Spearman's rho = 0.66, P = 0.04) but not with measurements during walking (Spearman's rho = 0.58, P = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Total navicular bone displacements determined by pMRI showed concurrent validity with stretch sensor measurements but only so under static loading conditions. Although assessment of total navicular displacement by combining concomitant vertical and medial navicular bone movements would appear advantageous compared to monoplanar measurement the combined measure did not seem to predict dynamic changes of the medial foot arch during walking, which are among several possible factors depending on different walking patterns.

Dynamic navicular motion measured using a stretch sensor is different between walking and running, and between over-ground and treadmill conditions

Background

Non-invasive evaluation of in-shoe foot motion has traditionally been difficult. Recently a novel ‘stretch-sensor’ was proposed as an easy and reliable method to measure dynamic foot (navicular) motion. Further validation of this method is needed to determine how different gait analysis protocols affect dynamic navicular motion.

Methods

Potential differences in magnitude and peak velocity of navicular motion using the ‘stretch sensor’ between (i) barefoot and shod conditions; (ii) overground and treadmill gait; and/or (iii) running and walking were evaluated in 26 healthy participants. Comparisons were made using paired t-tests.

Results

Magnitude and velocity of navicular motion was not different between barefoot and shod walking on the treadmill. Compared to walking, velocity of navicular motion during running was 59% and 210% higher over-ground (p < 0.0001) and on a treadmill (p < 0.0001) respectively, and magnitude of navicular motion was 23% higher during over-ground running compared to over-ground walking (p = 0.02). Compared to over-ground, magnitude of navicular motion on a treadmill was 21% and 16% greater during walking (p = 0.0004) and running (p = 0003) respectively. Additionally, maximal velocity of navicular motion during treadmill walking was 48% less than walking over-ground (p < 0.0001).

Conclusion

The presence of footwear has minimal impact on navicular motion during walking. Differences in navicular motion between walking and running, and treadmill and over-ground gait highlight the importance of task specificity during gait analysis. Task specificity should be considered during design of future research trials and in clinical practice when measuring navicular motion.