The arch myth: investigating the impact of flat foot on vertical jump height: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation Pub Date : 2024-11-28 DOI:10.1186/s13102-024-01018-w
Haibin Yu, Wenjian Wu, Weihsun Tai, Jing Li, Rui Zhang
{"title":"The arch myth: investigating the impact of flat foot on vertical jump height: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Haibin Yu, Wenjian Wu, Weihsun Tai, Jing Li, Rui Zhang","doi":"10.1186/s13102-024-01018-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The necessity to exclude flat foot when selecting athletes is a controversial issue. This study aimed to investigate whether flat foot affects vertical jump.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The quality of the literature was assessed using the observational study quality assessment tool provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care in Australia. Meta-analysis, heterogeneity testing, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and forest plot were conducted using Review Manager 5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the end, 9 articles met the meta-analysis criteria. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, only vertical jump height was used as an indicator for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis results showed low heterogeneity among studies (I<sup>2</sup> = 6%, P = 0.39), and the combined effect size showed no significant difference in jumping height between flat foot and normal foot (P = 0.73, ES = 0.13, 95%CI [-0.58, 0.83]). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in jump heights between flat and normal foot in either the adolescent subgroup (ES = 0.07, 95% CI [-1.04, 1.18]) or the adult subgroup (ES = 0.16, 95% CI [-0.76, 1.08]). Subgroups were divided according to training background, and jump height was unaffected by flat foot in both athletes (ES = -0.08, 95%CI [-1.07, 0.90]) and amateur (ES = 0.34, 95%CI [-0.67, 1.35]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, flat foot do not affect vertical jump height, although flat foot have different vertical jump biomechanics. This study breaks the bias that flat foot have poorer athletic performance. The meta-analysis has been registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42023481326.</p>","PeriodicalId":48585,"journal":{"name":"BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":"16 1","pages":"236"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603910/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-024-01018-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The necessity to exclude flat foot when selecting athletes is a controversial issue. This study aimed to investigate whether flat foot affects vertical jump.

Methods: The quality of the literature was assessed using the observational study quality assessment tool provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care in Australia. Meta-analysis, heterogeneity testing, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and forest plot were conducted using Review Manager 5.4.

Results: In the end, 9 articles met the meta-analysis criteria. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, only vertical jump height was used as an indicator for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis results showed low heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 6%, P = 0.39), and the combined effect size showed no significant difference in jumping height between flat foot and normal foot (P = 0.73, ES = 0.13, 95%CI [-0.58, 0.83]). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in jump heights between flat and normal foot in either the adolescent subgroup (ES = 0.07, 95% CI [-1.04, 1.18]) or the adult subgroup (ES = 0.16, 95% CI [-0.76, 1.08]). Subgroups were divided according to training background, and jump height was unaffected by flat foot in both athletes (ES = -0.08, 95%CI [-1.07, 0.90]) and amateur (ES = 0.34, 95%CI [-0.67, 1.35]).

Conclusion: Overall, flat foot do not affect vertical jump height, although flat foot have different vertical jump biomechanics. This study breaks the bias that flat foot have poorer athletic performance. The meta-analysis has been registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42023481326.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation
BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
196
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation is an open access, peer reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of sports medicine and the exercise sciences, including rehabilitation, traumatology, cardiology, physiology, and nutrition.
期刊最新文献
The arch myth: investigating the impact of flat foot on vertical jump height: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sprint and jump performance are determined by localized BIA - an ecological study in track and field adolescent athletes. The effects of combined exercises, short foot exercises, and short foot exercises with isometric hip abduction on navicular drop, static parameters, and postural sway in women with flat foot: A randomized trial. Associations between body mass index and physical fitness indicators among Chinese university students: a multicenter cross-sectional study. Self-assessed performance-based function test versus patient-reported outcome measures for knee and hip osteoarthritis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1