The effect of backpack load on intersegmental motions of the foot and plantar pressure in individuals with mild flatfoot

Kyung, Min Gyu; Bak, Ppu Ri; Lim, Jong Wook; Lee, Dong‐Oh; Park, Gil Young; Lee, Dong Yeon

doi:10.1186/s13047-022-00579-8

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although greater pressure was exerted in all areas, the greatest increase was recorded in the hindfoot. Similar results were obtained in Hohee's study of school-age children with at feet, among whom a signi cant increase in pressure was observed in the lateral and medial areas of the heel as greater weight was carried in the backpack 30 .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

The Biomechanical Effects of Backpack Weight on Foot Plantar Pressures Among Long-Distance Hikers: Observational study

Moya-Cuenca,

Zúnica-García,

Gracia-Sánchez

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Hiking is a prevalent activity with most participants carrying gear in backpacks. Though health experts recommend backpack weight not surpass 10–15% of a hiker's body weight, the effects on foot plantar pressures remain unclear.Methods Our cross-sectional observational study aimed to assess how varying backpack weights impact foot plantar pressure distribution during walking. We enlisted hikers who had covered at least 20 km in the preceding 24 hours. We recorded participants' sociodemographic and clinical details and utilized the Podoprint® platform to measure the area, force, and pressure on the forefoot, rearfoot, and entire foot. Measurements were taken without a backpack, with the hiker's actual backpack, and with backpacks loaded to 10% and 20% of the hiker's body weight.Results Results revealed a consistently higher force on the right foot across all conditions. Relative to no backpack, forefoot pressure increased by 5.41% and 8.73% with backpacks weighing 10% and 20% of body weight, respectively (p = 0.005), while increases for the rearfoot were 5.01% and 10.17% (p = 0.015), and for the entire foot, 5.04% and 9.61% (p = 0.002).Conclusions Surpassing 10% of body weight significantly altered foot pressure in both static and dynamic analyses. Our findings underscore the importance of adhering to recommended backpack weight guidelines to mitigate undue foot pressure during hiking.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

The Biomechanical Effects of Backpack Weight on Foot Plantar Pressures Among Long-Distance Hikers: Observational study

Moya-Cuenca,

Zúnica-García,

Gracia-Sánchez

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Discrepancies in plantar pressure distribution between affected and unaffected sides in patients with plantar fasciitis

Kyung,

Lee,

Moon

et al. 2024

J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose A fundamental understanding of plantar pressure distribution is important for prescribing an appropriate orthosis and applying nonoperative methods, such as stretching exercises, for the treatment of plantar fasciitis. Despite existing research on plantar pressure distribution, discrepancies between affected and unaffected sides in unilateral plantar fasciitis patients warrant further investigation. This study aimed to evaluate the plantar pressure distribution in patients with unilateral plantar fasciitis by comparing it with that on the contralateral unaffected side. Methods We retrospectively reviewed records from 20 consecutive patients diagnosed with unilateral plantar fasciitis, using the unaffected side as the control. The emed® pedobarographic system was used to measure the plantar pressure distribution during gait. The analysis was performed using a 4-mask configuration (toes, forefoot, midfoot, and hindfoot). Results Both sides showed no significant differences in radiographic parameters. The affected side showed a significantly higher contact area, maximum force, and force-time integrals in the midfoot. However, the unaffected side demonstrated significantly higher maximum force and force-time integrals in the hindfoot. There was no difference in the distribution of the peak pressure and pressure-time integrals between the two sides in all mask regions. The increased contact area and maximum force in the midfoot on the side with plantar fasciitis may result from heel pain-induced weight transfer from the hindfoot. Conclusion The findings of this study provide a basic understanding of plantar pressure distribution in the treatment of plantar fasciitis and highlight the importance of considering inter-side differences when designing treatment interventions or orthotic devices.

show abstract

Comparative Analysis of Two Pedobarography Systems

Kang,

Pyeun,

Kim

et al. 2024

J Korean Foot Ankle Soc

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Foot pressure measurement devices are used widely in clinical settings for plantar pressure assessments. Despite the availability of various devices, studies evaluating the inter-device reliability are limited. This study compared plantar pressure measurements obtained from HR Mat (Tekscan Inc.) and EMED-n50 (Novel GmbH). Materials and Methods:The study involved 38 healthy male volunteers. The participants were categorized into two groups based on the Meary's angle in standing foot lateral radiographs: those with normal feet (angles ranging from -4° to 4°) and those with mild flatfeet (angles from -8° to -15°). The static and dynamic plantar pressures of the participants were measured using HR Mat and EMED-n50. The reliability of the contact area and mean force was assessed using the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Furthermore, the differences in measurements between the two devices were examined, considering the presence of mild flatfoot. Results:The ICC values for the contact area and mean force ranged from 0.703 to 0.947, indicating good-to-excellent reliability across all areas. EMED-n50 tended to record higher contact areas than HR Mat. The mean force was significantly higher in the forefoot region when measured with EMED-n50, whereas, in the hindfoot region, this difference was observed only during static measurements with HR Mat. Participants with mild flatfeet exhibited significantly higher contact areas in the midfoot region for both devices, with no consistent differences in the other parameters. Conclusion:The contact area and mean force measurements of the HR Mat and EMED-n50 showed high reliability. On the other hand, EMED-n50 tended to record higher contact areas than HR Mat. In cases of mild flatfoot, an increase in contact area within the midfoot region was observed, but no consistent impact on the differences between the two devices was evident.

show abstract

The effect of backpack load on intersegmental motions of the foot and plantar pressure in individuals with mild flatfoot

Cited by 3 publications

References 42 publications

The Biomechanical Effects of Backpack Weight on Foot Plantar Pressures Among Long-Distance Hikers: Observational study

The Biomechanical Effects of Backpack Weight on Foot Plantar Pressures Among Long-Distance Hikers: Observational study

Discrepancies in plantar pressure distribution between affected and unaffected sides in patients with plantar fasciitis

Comparative Analysis of Two Pedobarography Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About