Empreintes de pieds dynamiques ou statiques : calculs comparés de l'angle et de l'appui de la marche

S.-A. Curran , D. Upton , I.-D. Learmonth
{"title":"Empreintes de pieds dynamiques ou statiques : calculs comparés de l'angle et de l'appui de la marche","authors":"S.-A. Curran ,&nbsp;D. Upton ,&nbsp;I.-D. Learmonth","doi":"10.1016/j.emcpol.2005.06.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Information derived from footprint data serves as a useful, reliable and objective component to the assessment of patients with musculoskeletal pathology. Common spatial parameters extrapolated from such data include the angle and base of gait. Previous research has described a reliable method for analysing dynamic footprint data. While this data remains fundamental, few studies, if any have documented the comparisons of dynamic and static footprints. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the differences between the angle and base of gait from dynamic and static footprint data. Twenty-five subjects provided three dynamic (mid-gait analysis) and three static footprints. Intra-rater reliability of the measurement technique for both the angle and base of gait was found to be excellent (<em>P</em> <!-->&gt;0.001) for each of the two conditions (dynamic and static). Comparisons between the dynamic and static condition revealed no significant differences (<em>P</em> <!-->&lt;0.0001) for the angle of gait, whilst significant differences were noted between the static and dynamic condition for the base of gait. Further analysis using linear regression identified that the angle of gait for the left and right foot predicted a 67 and 60% of that of a dynamic situation; a slightly lower prediction of 54% was noted for base of gait. These results suggest that static footprints do demonstrate some prediction of dynamic function when assessing the angle and base of gait in normal subjects.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100444,"journal":{"name":"EMC - Podologie","volume":"1 3","pages":"Pages 49-56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.emcpol.2005.06.001","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EMC - Podologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1769686005000103","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Information derived from footprint data serves as a useful, reliable and objective component to the assessment of patients with musculoskeletal pathology. Common spatial parameters extrapolated from such data include the angle and base of gait. Previous research has described a reliable method for analysing dynamic footprint data. While this data remains fundamental, few studies, if any have documented the comparisons of dynamic and static footprints. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the differences between the angle and base of gait from dynamic and static footprint data. Twenty-five subjects provided three dynamic (mid-gait analysis) and three static footprints. Intra-rater reliability of the measurement technique for both the angle and base of gait was found to be excellent (P >0.001) for each of the two conditions (dynamic and static). Comparisons between the dynamic and static condition revealed no significant differences (P <0.0001) for the angle of gait, whilst significant differences were noted between the static and dynamic condition for the base of gait. Further analysis using linear regression identified that the angle of gait for the left and right foot predicted a 67 and 60% of that of a dynamic situation; a slightly lower prediction of 54% was noted for base of gait. These results suggest that static footprints do demonstrate some prediction of dynamic function when assessing the angle and base of gait in normal subjects.

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
动态或静态脚印:行走角度和支撑的比较计算
从足迹数据中获得的信息是评估肌肉骨骼病理患者的有用、可靠和客观的组成部分。从这些数据推断出的常见空间参数包括步态的角度和基础。先前的研究已经描述了一种分析动态足迹数据的可靠方法。虽然这些数据仍然是基本的,但很少有研究(如果有的话)记录了动态和静态足迹的比较。本研究的目的是从动态和静态足迹数据中确定步态的角度和基础之间的差异。25名受试者提供了三个动态(步态中期分析)和三个静态足迹。发现对于两种条件(动态和静态)中的每一种,步态角度和基底的测量技术的评分者内可靠性都是极好的(P>0.001)。动态和静态条件之间的比较显示步态角度没有显著差异(P<;0.0001),而步态基础的静态和动态条件之间有显著差异。使用线性回归的进一步分析表明,左脚和右脚的步态角度预测了动态情况的67%和60%;步态基础的预测值略低,为54%。这些结果表明,在评估正常受试者步态的角度和基础时,静态足迹确实表明了对动态功能的一些预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Quand faut-il prendre l’avis d’un chirurgien d’orthopédie pédiatrique Toxicités podologiques des traitements anticancéreux Neuropathie périphérique et contrôle postural Névralgie de Morton Kératodermie mécanique, kératodermie dynamique
×
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