Footprint Parameters as a Measure of Arch Height
- 1 January 1992
- journal article
- research article
- Published by SAGE Publications in Foot & Ankle
- Vol. 13 (1) , 22-26
- https://doi.org/10.1177/107110079201300104
Abstract
The human foot has frequently been categorized into arch height groups based upon analysis of footprint parameters. This study investigates the relationship between directly measured arch height and many of the footprint parameters that have been assumed to represent arch height. A total of 115 male subjects were measured and footprint parameters were calculated from digitized outlines. Correlation and regression analyses were used to determine the relationship between footprint measures and arch height. It may be concluded from the results that footprint parameters proposed in the literature (arch angle, footprint index, and arch index) and two further parameters suggested in this study (arch length index and truncated arch index) are invalid as a basis for prediction or categorization of arch height. The categorization of the human foot according to the footprint measures evaluated in this paper represent no more than indices and angles of the plantar surface of the foot itself.Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Footprint Analysis Between Three and Seventeen Years of AgeFoot & Ankle, 1990
- Relationship between selected static an dynamic lower extremity measuresClinical Biomechanics, 1989
- Combined Effect of Foot Arch Structure and an Orthotic Device on Stress FracturesFoot & Ankle, 1989
- CLINICIAN ASSESSMENT OF MEDIAL LONGITUDINAL ARCH FROM PHOTOGRAPHSMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 1989
- The longitudinal arch. A survey of eight hundred and eighty-two feet in normal children and adultsJournal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 1987
- The arch index: A useful measure from footprintsJournal of Biomechanics, 1987
- The diagnosis of flat foot in the childThe Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British volume, 1985
- Standardizing Methods of Measurement of Foot Shape by Including the Effects of Subtalar RotationFoot & Ankle, 1981