Comparison of foot muscle morphology and foot kinematics between recreational runners with normal feet and with asymptomatic over-pronated feet

Zhang, Xianyi; Aeles, Jeroen; Vanwanseele, Benedicte

doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.03.030

Cited by 52 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A larger cross-sectional area of FHBM was significantly associated with a higher FPI (more pronated) even when controlled for truncated foot length. Zhang and colleagues reported a significantly larger AbH (> 4.3%) and flexor digitorum brevis (> 18.7%) associated with a more pronated FPI (6.6), [ 52 ] (Table 5 ) but they did not analyse FHB due to difficulty in identifying the muscle border. They proposed that the larger forefoot muscles of people with more pronated feet contribute to control of the forefoot abduction motion during gait.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and correlates of cross‐sectional area of abductor hallucis and the medial belly of the flexor hallucis brevis measured by ultrasound

Latey

Burns

Nightingale

et al. 2018

Journal of Foot and Ankle Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundWeakness of the intrinsic foot muscles is thought to produce deformity, disability and pain. Assessing intrinsic foot muscles in isolation is a challenge; however ultrasound might provide a solution. The aims of this study were to assess the reproducibility of assessing the size of abductor halluces (AbH) and the medial belly of flexor hallucis brevis (FHBM) muscles, and identify their relationship with toe strength, foot morphology and balance.MethodsTwenty one participants aged 26–64 years were measured on two occasions for muscle cross-sectional area using a Siemens Acuson X300 Ultrasound System with 5-13 MHz linear array transducer. Great toe flexor strength was measured by pedobarography, the paper grip test and hand-held dynamometry. Foot morphology was assessed by foot length, truncated foot length, Foot Posture Index (FPI) and dorsal arch height. Balance was measured by the maximal step test. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC3,1) were used to evaluate intra-rater reliability. Pearson’s correlation coefficients were performed to assess associations between muscle size and strength, morphology and balance measures. To account for the influence of physical body size, partial correlations were also performed controlling for truncated foot length.ResultsIntra-rater reliability was excellent for AbH (ICC3,1 = 0.97) and FHBM (ICC3,1 = 0.96). Significant associations were found between cross-sectional area of AbH and great toe flexion force measured standing by pedobarography (r = .623, p = .003),), arch height measured sitting (r = .597, p = .004) and standing (r = .590, p = .005), foot length (r = .582, p = 006), truncated foot length (r = .580, p = .006), balance (r = .443, p = .044), weight (r = .662, p = .001), height (r = .559, p = .008), and BMI (r = .502, p = .020). Significant associations were found between cross-sectional area of FHBM and FPI (r = .544, p = .011), truncated foot length (r = .483, p = .027) and foot length (r = .451, p = .040). Significant partial associations were found between AbH and great toe flexion force in standing by pedobarography (r = .562, p = .012) and FHBM and the FPI (r = .631, p = .003).ConclusionsMeasuring the cross-sectional area of AbH and FHBM with ultrasound is reproducible. Measures of strength, morphology and balance appear to relate more to the size of AbH than FHBM. After controlling for physical body size, cross-sectional area of AbH remained a significant correlate of great toe flexor strength and might be a useful biomarker to measure early therapeutic response to exercise.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and correlates of cross‐sectional area of abductor hallucis and the medial belly of the flexor hallucis brevis measured by ultrasound

Latey

Burns

Nightingale

et al. 2018

Journal of Foot and Ankle Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…foot function, foot pronation, gait kinematic, injury, multi-segment foot model, plantar pressure been widely studied and is largely associated with musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), such as medial tibial stress syndrome, 7 patellofemoral pain, 8 or low back pain. 9 The effect of FF on gait kinematics [10][11][12][13][14][15] and plantar pressure distribution 16,17 has been well-documented. However, the relationship between foot posture and foot function has recently been questioned, 18,19 raising doubts regarding the kinematic link between FF and FP and thus between FP and MSD.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The biomechanical effects of pronated foot function on gait. An experimental study

Dodelin

Tourny

L’Hermette

2020

Scandinavian Med Sci Sports

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is an ongoing debate in the literature regarding the relationships between static foot posture, dynamic foot function, and lower limb musculoskeletal disorders. 1,2 One reason for this debate is the common confusion between foot posture, which is static, and foot function, which is dynamic. 3 Foot pronation (FP) designates a movement of the whole foot. 4 It has been defined as "a range of motion within the foot that makes the foot more prone to the support surface that is greater than that required by the individual to adjust to morphology or to adapt to the forces placed in the musculoskeletal system by kinetic and kinematic events within gait or another given action." 3 A few studies have evaluated the effect of different types of foot function on gait kinematics. Foot pronation is commonly associated with the flat foot (FF) static foot posture, 3 and several studies have reported a relationship between FP and FF. 5,6 The static FF posture has

show abstract

“…Angin et al showed that the AH of the flat foot was smaller than that of the normal foot, but they did not assess the ADM 15) . Zhang et al reported that flat feet have a larger AH, flexor digitorum brevis and longus, and a smaller ADM muscle than controls 11) . Results of our studies are similar to their results.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is difficult to assess the function of intrinsic muscles of the foot. Recently, the intrinsic muscles of the foot were assessed in flat feet by ultrasonography 10,11) . However, therapy that changes both the thickness and the cross sectional area of the intrinsic muscles of the foot is controversial, and the relationship of intrinsic foot musculature and kinematics of the foot during gait is unclear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of foot kinematics and the morphology of intrinsic musculature of the foot using a foot-type classification based on function

Kudo

Sakamoto

Shirakawa³

2020

J Phys Ther Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to investigate a correlation between the morphology of the intrinsic musculature of the foot and foot kinematics during gait using a foot type classification based on the windlass function. [Participants and Methods] We examined 67 feet of 35 healthy participants in this study. We collected three-dimensional foot kinematic data during gait from the Oxford Foot Model and assessed the morphology of the flexor digitorum brevis, abductor hallucis, adductor halluces (oblique head), and abductor digiti minimi muscles using B-mode ultrasound. Using the Foot Posture Index (six-item version), we divided static foot postures into two groups: normal arch and flatfoot. Subsequently, we compared foot kinematics and the morphology of the intrinsic musculature among the four groups using the analysis of variance with the Bonferroni test. [Results] Foot kinematics of the flatfoot-adduction type during gait significantly differed from that of the normal arch-abduction type. The abductor digiti minimi of the flatfoot-adduction type was significantly thinner than that of the normal archabduction type. [Conclusion] There may be some variations in flatfoot, and the flatfoot-abduction type might not be a risk factor for overuse injuries.

show abstract

Comparison of foot muscle morphology and foot kinematics between recreational runners with normal feet and with asymptomatic over-pronated feet

Cited by 52 publications

References 28 publications

Reliability and correlates of cross‐sectional area of abductor hallucis and the medial belly of the flexor hallucis brevis measured by ultrasound

Reliability and correlates of cross‐sectional area of abductor hallucis and the medial belly of the flexor hallucis brevis measured by ultrasound

The biomechanical effects of pronated foot function on gait. An experimental study

Comparison of foot kinematics and the morphology of intrinsic musculature of the foot using a foot-type classification based on function

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About