Objective: To compare the results from fingertip-to-floor and straight leg raise tests by means of photogrammetry, investigate the concordance of hip angle findings between the two tests and evaluate the intra and inter-examiner reliability of the photogrammetric analysis procedure. Method: The tests were applied to 35 healthy male subjects (mean age 23 ± 3.4 years, height 170 ± 4 cm and weight 68 ± 11 kg). The subjects were divided into two groups on the basis of the test classifications. Surface markers were placed on bone references in order to calculate the hip, thoracolumbar, leg, knee and tibiotarsal angles. The reliability of the photogrammetric analysis procedure on the angles measured by two examiners was tested. Results: For the hip angle, there were significant differences between the flexibility groups in both tests, and subjects with reduced flexibility had lower angles. There was a significant difference (22.8%) between the classifications designated by the two tests. However, the hip angle showed high levels of concordance between the tests (ICC: 0.89 and mean difference of -0.85°). The photogrammetric procedures presented high reliability rates, both for intra and inter-examiner (ICC ranging from 0.94 to 0.99). Conclusion: The tests presented differences in the classification of the subjects' flexibility. However, considering the hip angle, there was high concordance between the test results. The photogrammetric analysis procedures were reproducible, both for intra and for interexaminer measurements, thus making this a useful analysis tool for the tests in question.

Objective: To evaluate ankle movements of healthy individuals walking on a treadmill, by means of a flexible electrogoniometer. Method: Dorsiflexion and plantar flexion and eversion/inversion movements were recorded for 90 seconds at a velocity of 5.0 km/h. Ten healthy young men of mean age 21.4 ± 2.99 years and mean height 1.62 ± 0.22 meters took part in this study. The data were analyzed descriptively (mean, standard deviation, maximum and minimum). In the sagittal plane, the gait cycle was analyzed at three times, taking the movement peaks: foot flat (FF), midstance (M) and toe off (TO). The inversion and eversion angles corresponding to these phases were identified, as well as movement peaks during gait cycles. Inter and intra-subject coefficients of variability (CV) were calculated. Results: The mean values for the sagittal plane, for the left and right ankles were, respectively: 7º and 4º at FF, 2º and 7º at M, and 24º and 19º at TO. For the frontal plane, the results were inversion of 5º and 3º FF, 4º and 5º at M, and 15º and 16º at TO. The peak values were inversion of 17º and 18º and eversion of 1º. The maximum intrasubject CV was 0.39, and the maximum inter-subject CV was 0.44. Conclusion: The results obtained from the electrogoniometer were relatively similar to data reported in the literature for the sagittal plane, but not for the frontal plane. The discrepancies between studies measuring ankle movements suggest the need for standardization of the recording procedures.

Introduction: The knee joint stands out as a structure that is commonly affected by degenerative alterations, injuries and syndromes. Precise objective clinical evaluations are necessary for establishing appropriate diagnoses and, consequently, better results from both surgical procedures and rehabilitation programs. Objective: To investigate the existence of differences between the knees during gait and their relationship with the static difference in the sagittal and frontal planes. Method: Forty-five healthy subjects were included, of whom 21 were male and 24 were female. Knee joint range of motion was measured during gait by means of flexible electrogoniometry. The static posture of the knee was evaluated by means of photogrammetry. The data were analyzed descriptively and the Pearson correlation coefficient was applied. Results: The individuals presented mean values that were similar for right and left knees in static recordings of the sagittal and frontal planes (difference of approximately 0.5º). However, the standard deviation was large, thus indicating great variability between the subjects. For the dynamic recordings, the difference between the knees was 0.4º for the sagittal plane and 1º for the frontal plane. The variability found was also large, especially for the frontal plane. There was no correlation between the static and dynamic recordings in the two planes of motion evaluated (r =-0.003 and p = 0.492 for the sagittal plane; r =-0.014 and p = 0.465 for the frontal plane). Conclusion: Although no relationship was found between the static and dynamic recordings, this matter deserves investigation in future studies, with evaluations of broader groups with specific and more pronounced postural abnormalities.