Analysis on the Feet-Pressure between Flatfoot and Normal Foot

Abstract:

Inquire into normal foot and the foot bottom of the flatfoot pressure difference to provide a reference. Carring on footprint diagraph to 206 volunteers, is divided into normal foot according to the foot bow blank width in the footprint 157, 49 flatfoots.Adopt foot bottom pressure's distributing to test system is checked the foot bottom pressure to carry on diagraph to 2 sets.Measure medium be checked request to take off shoes and socks to tread Tai to walk as usual, take three average value, dynamic state's recording 2 sets is checked foot bottom pressure.As usual fully the contact area of heel and front forefootis bigger than flatfoot, p<0.05;As usual fully the bow contact area is smaller than flatfoot, p<0.05.As usual fully bow and front the blunt quantity that forefootis subjected to is smaller than flatfoot, p<0.05;Normal heel is hurtled Be had great capacity to flatfoot, p<0.05;Under static state and dynamic state circumstance the pressures of the forefootand the foot bow acceptance are all bigger than normal foot before the flatfoot, p<0.05.Conclusion:Flatfoot the pressure center is more intensive while hitting the ground, its foot bow and front the blunt quantity been subjected to by forefootis a little bit greatly.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volume 442)
• Pages: 149-153
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.442.149
• Online since: January 2012
• Authors: Wei Fei Fang
• Keywords: Flatfoot, Foot Bottom Pressure, Normal Foot

References

[1] YanxiChen, GuangrongYu, JiongMei , et al. Research progress in surgical treatment of flatfoot. Foreign Medical Sciences ( bone Science Fascicule ), 2003, 24 ( 6): 374-376.

[2] Wacker J, Calder JD, Engstrom CM et al. MR morphometry of posterior tibialis muscle in adult acquired flat foot. [J]. Foot &amp; amp; ankle international, 2003, 24(4): 354-357.

DOI: 10.1177/107110070302400409

[3] Lange B, Chipchase L, Evans A et al. The effect of low-Dye taping on plantar pressures, during gait, in subjects with navicular drop exceeding 10 mm. The Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, 2004, 34(4): 201-209.

DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2004.34.4.201

[4] Echarri JJ, Forriol F. The development in footprint morphology in 1851 Congolese children from urban and rural areas, and the relationship between this and wearing shoes. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics. B, 2003, 12(2): 141-146.

DOI: 10.1097/01202412-200303000-00012

[5] Wacker JT, Hennessy MS, Saxby TS et al. Calcaneal osteotomy and transfer of the tendon of flexor digitorum longus for stage-II dysfunction of tibialis posterior. Three- to five-year results. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British Volume), 2002, 84(1): 54-58.

DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.84b1.0840054

[6] Davitt JS, MacWilliams BA, Armstrong PF et al. Plantar pressure and radiographic changes after distal calcaneal lengthening in children and adolescents. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics, 2001, 21(1): 70-75.

DOI: 10.1097/01241398-200101000-00015

[7] Thomas, RL, Wells, BC, Garrison, RL et al. Preliminary results comparing two methods of lateral column lengthening. Foot & amp; amp; ankle international, 2001, 22(2): 107-119.

DOI: 10.1177/107110070102200205