Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2020; 55(04): 490-496
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3402464
Artigos Originais
Tornozelo e Pé

Interobserver Agreement of the Static Methods of Evaluating the Types of Footprint in Runners[*]

Article in several languages: português | English
Rafael Rocha Macedo 
1   Hospital IFOR - Rede D'Or São Luiz, São Bernardo do Campo, SP, Brasil
2   Disciplina de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil
,
Thiago Kazunori Neves Kanashiro 
1   Hospital IFOR - Rede D'Or São Luiz, São Bernardo do Campo, SP, Brasil
,
Gustavo Henrique Ramalho de Mattos 
1   Hospital IFOR - Rede D'Or São Luiz, São Bernardo do Campo, SP, Brasil
,
Alexandre Alcaide 
3   Clínica de Ortopedia e Recuperação Desportiva, Santo André, SP, Brasil
,
Luciano Miller Reis Rodrigues 
2   Disciplina de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil
,
Eiffel Tsuyoshi Dobashi 
1   Hospital IFOR - Rede D'Or São Luiz, São Bernardo do Campo, SP, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the accuracy of interobserver diagnostic methods of the type of footprint among running athletes using three evaluation methods: physical examination, podoscopy, and baropodometry compared with radiographic measurement of Meary angles and calcaneal pitch.

Methods This is a cross-sectional study of athletes who practice running. The inclusion criteria were: individuals with minimum age of 18 years and maximum age of 65, male or female, healthy and without comorbidities that interfere with running performance; regular practitioners who run at least twice a week; body mass index between 18.5 and 29.99 Kg/m2; acceptance of the written informed consent form (WICF). The non-inclusion criteria included: presence of previous or active injuries that compromise sports activity; previous foot surgeries; obesity. Forty patients were selected, 29 (72.5%) male and 11 (27.5%) female, whose mean age was 39 years (minimum 19 years and maximum 61 years). The body mass index (BMI) of the 40 patients ranged from 21.00 to 29.99 kg/m2 (mean 25.48 kg/m2 with standard deviation of 2.39 kg/m2 and a median of 25.50 kg/m2). We excluded those with values above 29.99. Running frequency ranged from 2 to 5 times per week (average 3.13 times per week, with standard deviation of 0.79 times per week and median of 3 times per week). Physical examination, podoscopy, and baropodometry were performed, and their evaluation was made by 4 examiners. Additionally, the results were compared with the radiographic classification of the footprint type obtained by measuring the Meary angles and the calcaneal pitch.

Results The interobserver agreement of these parameters was verified by the weighted Kappa agreement index, in which we obtained a significant agreement between the participants considering physical examination, podoscopy, and baropodometry, and according to the Kappa index. The agreement was marginal when comparing the results of the three methods with the radiographic angular classification.

Conclusion We obtained excellent agreement among observers when considering physical examination, podoscopy, and baropodometry for the diagnosis of the footprint type among runners. However, when comparing the results obtained with the radiographic measurements, the agreement for the diagnosis of footprint type was low.

Keywords

foot - moderate running - physical examination

* Study conducted at Orthopedics and Sports Recovery Clinic, Santo André, SP, Brazil.




Publication History

Received: 06 February 2019

Accepted: 13 September 2019

Article published online:
02 April 2020

© 2020. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Neto Junior J, Pastre CM, Monteiro HL. Alterações posturais em atletas brasileiros do sexo masculino que participaram de provas de potência muscular em competições internacionais. Rev Bras Med Esporte 2004; 10 (03) 195-198
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Lun V, Meeuwisse WH, Stergiou P, Stefanyshyn D. Relation between running injury and static lower limb alignment in recreational runners. Br J Sports Med 2004; 38 (05) 576-580
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Mutti D. Futsal da iniciação ao alto nível. 2a ed. São Paulo: Phorte; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 4 Mattos HM, Pryzsiezny WL. Análise baropodométrica da influência podal na postura. Rev Ter Man Fisioter Manip 2004; 3 (01) 240-246
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Guimarães GV, Freitas HF, Silva PR, Teixeira LR. Pés: devemos avaliá-los ao praticar atividade físico-esportiva?. Rev Bras Med Esporte 2000; 6 (02) 57-59
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Nigg BM, Khan A, Fisher V, Stefanyshyn D. Effect of shoe insert construction on foot and leg movement. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1998; 30 (04) 550-555
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Mansour E, Yaacoub JJ, Bakouny Z, Assi A, Ghanem I. A podoscopic and descriptive study of foot deformities in patients with Down syndrome. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2017; 103 (01) 123-127
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Libotte M. Podoscopíe électronique. Encyclopédie médico-chirurgicale: Kinésithérapie rééducation fonctionnelle. Paris: Elsevier; 2000
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Stebbins JA, Harrington ME, Giacomozzi C, Thompson N, Zavatsky A, Theologis TN. Assessment of sub-division of plantar pressure measurement in children. Gait Posture 2005; 22 (04) 372-376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Leite NM, Faloppa F. Propedêutica ortopédica e traumatológica. Porto Alegre: Atmed; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Coughlin MJ, Mann RA, Saltzman CL. Surgery of the foot and ankle. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Mosby-Elsevier; 2007
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Rosner BA. Fundamentals of biostatistics. 4th ed. Belmont: Duxbury Press; 1995
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Yang DJ, Park SK, Kim JH, Heo JW, Lee YS, Uhm YH. Effect of changes in postural alignment on foot pressure and walking ability of stroke patients. J Phys Ther Sci 2015; 27 (09) 2943-2945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Robinson CC, Balbinot LF, Silva MF, Achaval M, Zaro MA. Plantar pressure distribution patterns of individuals with prediabetes in comparison with healthy individuals and individuals with diabetes. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2013; 7 (05) 1113-1121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Buldt AK, Forghany S, Landorf KB, Levinger P, Murley GS, Menz HB. Foot posture is associated with plantar pressure during gait: A comparison of normal, planus and cavus feet. Gait Posture 2018; 62: 235-240
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Ward ED, Phillips RD, Patterson PE, Werkhoven GJ. 1998 William J. Stickel Gold Award. The effects of extrinsic muscle forces on the forefoot-to-rearfoot loading relationship in vitro. Tibia and Achilles tendon. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 1998; 88 (10) 471-482
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Baumfeld D, Baumfeld T, da Rocha RL. , et al. Reliability of baropodometry on the evaluation of plantar load distribution: a transversal study. BioMed Res Int 2017; 2017: 5925137
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar