Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 68 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 91 - 99 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904 İndeks Tarihi: 21-05-2023

Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index

Öz:
Objectives: This study aims to compare ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure distribution of athletes according to foot posture index (FPI). Patients and methods: Between September 2016 and May 2018, a total of 70 volunteer male athletes (mean age: 21.1±2.3 years; range, 18 to 25 years) were included. The athletes were divided into three groups according to their FPI as follows: having supinated feet (Group 1, n=16), neutral/normal feet (Group 2, n=36), or pronated feet (Group 3, n=18). Ankle range of motion (ROM), muscle flexibility, ankle joint strength, and plantar pressure distribution were measured. Results: There were significant differences among the three groups in both right and left ankle dorsiflexion ROM (p=0.009 and p=0.003, respectively). Group 1 had significantly smaller dorsiflexion ROM than the other groups. Group 1 also showed significantly less flexibility in the gastrocnemius and soleus muscles than the other foot posture groups. Groups 2 and 3 exhibited significant differences in the maximum torque (p=0.018), maximum work (p=0.008), and total work (p=0.008) of the right plantar flexor muscles at 60°/sec angular velocity. Peak pressure measurements of the right foot were higher in Group 1, compared to Groups 2 and 3 (p<0.001). Conclusion: The results of this study may help to enhance athletic performance by providing a guide for designing training programs appropriate for athletes with different foot types to address their specific muscle flexibility and strength deficiencies.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • 1. Sun PC, Shih SL, Chen YL, Hsu YC, Yang RC, Chen CS. Biomechanical analysis of foot with different foot arch heights: A finite element analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 2012;15:563-9.
  • 2. Panichawit C, Bovonsunthonchai S, Vachalathiti R, Limpasutirachata K. Effects of foot muscles training on plantar pressure distribution during gait, foot muscle strength, and foot function in persons with flexible flatfoot. J Med Assoc Thai 2015;98 Suppl 5:S12-7.
  • 3. O’Brien DL, Tyndyk M. Effect of arch type and Body Mass Index on plantar pressure distribution during stance phase of gait. Acta Bioeng Biomech 2014;16:131-5.
  • 4. Blackwood CB, Yuen TJ, Sangeorzan BJ, Ledoux WR. The midtarsal joint locking mechanism. Foot Ankle Int 2005;26:1074-80.
  • 5. Huang CK, Kitaoka HB, An KN, Chao EY. Biomechanical evaluation of longitudinal arch stability. Foot Ankle 1993;14:353-7.
  • 6. Murley GS, Menz HB, Landorf KB. Foot posture influences the electromyographic activity of selected lower limb muscles during gait. J Foot Ankle Res 2009;2:35.
  • 7. Root ML, Weed JH, Sgarlato TE, Bluth D. Axis of motion of the subtalar joint. J Am Podiatr Assoc 1966;54:149-55.
  • 8. Wang WJ, Crompton RH. Analysis of the human and ape foot during bipedal standing with implications for the evolution of the foot. J Biomech 2004;37:1831-6.
  • 9. Kibler WB, Goldberg C, Chandler TJ. Functional biomechanical deficits in running athletes with plantar fasciitis. Am J Sports Med 1991;19:66-71.
  • 10. Riddle DL, Pulisic M, Pidcoe P, Johnson RE. Risk factors for plantar fasciitis: a matched case-control study. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2003;85:872-7.
  • 11. Warren BL, Davis V. Determining predictor variables for running-related pain. Phys Ther 1988;68:647-51.
  • 12. Forghany S, Nester CJ, Tyson S, Preece S, Jones RK. Plantar pressure distribution in people with stroke and association with functional mobility. JRSR 2019;6:80-5.
  • 13. Lee SY, Hertel J. Effect of static foot alignment on plantarpressure measures during running. J Sport Rehabil 2012;21:137-43.
  • 14. Chow TH, Chen YS, Wang JC. Characteristics of plantar pressures and related pain profiles in elite sprinters and recreational runners. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 2018;108:33-44.
  • 15. Chuter VH, Janse de Jonge XA. Proximal and distal contributions to lower extremity injury: A review of the literature. Gait Posture 2012;36:7-15.
  • 16. Han JT, Lee JH, Lee EJ, Lim CH, Kim WB. Comparison of plantar pressure between flat and normal feet when crossing an obstacle at different heights. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2015;28:629-33.
  • 17. Redmond, A. The Foot Posture Index: User Guide and Manual. 2005. Available at: http:// www.leeds.ac.uk/medicine/FASTER/z/pdf/FPI-manual-formatted-August-2005v2.pdf [Accessed: September 29, 2014]
  • 18. Keenan AM, Redmond AC, Horton M, Conaghan PG, Tennant A. The Foot Posture Index: Rasch analysis of a novel, foot-specific outcome measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007;88:88-93.
  • 19. Cornwall MW, McPoil TG, Lebec M, Vicenzino B, Wilson J. Reliability of the modified Foot Posture Index. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 2008;98:7-13.
  • 20. Redmond AC, Crosbie J, Ouvrier RA. Development and validation of a novel rating system for scoring standing foot posture: The Foot Posture Index. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2006;21:89-98.
  • 21. Tavares P, Landsman V, Wiltshire L. Intra-examiner reliability of measurements of ankle range of motion using a modified inclinometer: A pilot study. J Can Chiropr Assoc 2017;61:121-7.
  • 22. Menadue C, Raymond J, Kilbreath SL, Refshauge KM, Adams R. Reliability of two goniometric methods of measuring active inversion and eversion range of motion at the ankle. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2006;7:60.
  • 23. Ozer K, Physical fitness. Ankara: Nobel Publisher; 2001.
  • 24. Gore CJ. Physiological Tests for Elite Athletes. Australian Sports Commission. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics; 2000. p. 112-3.
  • 25. Chan KM, Maffulli N. Principles and practice of isokinetics in sports medicine and rehabilitation. Hong Kong: Williams & Wilkins; 1996.
  • 26. Taylor AJ, Menz, HB, Keenan AM. The influence of walking speed on plantar pressure measurements using the two-step gait initiation protocol. The Foot 2004;14:49-55.
  • 27. Cornwall MW, McPoil TG. Relationship between static foot posture and foot mobility. J Foot Ankle Res 2011;4:4.
  • 28. Buldt AK, Murley GS, Butterworth P, Levinger P, Menz HB, Landorf KB. The relationship between foot posture and lower limb kinematics during walking: A systematic review. Gait Posture 2013;38:363-72.
  • 29. Zifchock RA, Theriot C, Hillstrom HJ, Song J, Neary M. The relationship between arch height and arch flexibility: A proposed arch flexibility classification system for the description of multidimensional foot structure. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 2017;107:119-23.
  • 30. Rowlett CA, Hanney WJ, Pabian PS, McArthur JH, Rothschild CE, Kolber MJ. Efficacy of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization in comparison to gastrocnemius-soleus stretching for dorsiflexion range of motion: A randomized controlled trial. J Bodyw Mov Ther 2019;23:233-40.
  • 31. Justine M, Ruzali D, Hazidin E, Said A, Bukry SA, Manaf H. Range of motion, muscle length, and balance performance in older adults with normal, pronated, and supinated feet. J Phys Ther Sci 2016;28:916-22.
  • 32. Kang MH, Kim JW, Choung SD, Park KN, Kwon OY, Oh JS. Immediate effect of walking with talus-stabilizing taping on ankle kinematics in subjects with limited ankle dorsiflexion. Phys Ther Sport 2014;15:156-61.
  • 33. Lorimer AV, Hume PA. Stiffness as a risk factor for Achilles tendon injury in running athletes. Sports Med 2016;46:1921-38.
  • 34. Martin RL, Chimenti R, Cuddeford T, Houck J, Matheson JW, McDonough CM, et al. Achilles pain, stiffness, and muscle power deficits: Midportion Achilles tendinopathy revision 2018. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2018;48:A1-A38.
  • 35. Morita N, Yamauchi J, Kurihara T, Fukuoka R, Otsuka M, Okuda T, et al. Toe flexor strength and foot arch height in children. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2015;47:350-6.
  • 36. Snook AG. The relationship between excessive pronation as measured by navicular drop and isokinetic strength of the ankle musculature. Foot Ankle Int 2001;22:234-40.
  • 37. Fourchet F. Foot-ankle injury prevention in adolescent athletes. Reims: URCA University of Reims Champagne Ardennes; 2012.
  • 38. Cobb SC, Bazett-Jones DM, Joshi MN, Earl-Boehm JE, James CR. The relationship among foot posture, core and lower extremity muscle function, and postural stability. J Athl Train 2014;49:173-80.
  • 39. Kwan RL, Zheng YP, Cheing GL. The effect of aging on the biomechanical properties of plantar soft tissues. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2010;25:601-5.
  • 40. Williams DS 3rd, Tierney RN, Butler RJ. Increased medial longitudinal arch mobility, lower extremity kinematics, and ground reaction forces in high-arched runners. J Athl Train 2014;49:290-6.
APA Kalender H, UZUNER K, ŞİMŞEK D, BAYRAM I (2022). Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. , 91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
Chicago Kalender Hülya,UZUNER Kubilay,ŞİMŞEK Deniz,BAYRAM ISMAIL Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. (2022): 91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
MLA Kalender Hülya,UZUNER Kubilay,ŞİMŞEK Deniz,BAYRAM ISMAIL Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. , 2022, ss.91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
AMA Kalender H,UZUNER K,ŞİMŞEK D,BAYRAM I Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. . 2022; 91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
Vancouver Kalender H,UZUNER K,ŞİMŞEK D,BAYRAM I Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. . 2022; 91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
IEEE Kalender H,UZUNER K,ŞİMŞEK D,BAYRAM I "Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index." , ss.91 - 99, 2022. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
ISNAD Kalender, Hülya vd. "Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index". (2022), 91-99. https://doi.org/10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
APA Kalender H, UZUNER K, ŞİMŞEK D, BAYRAM I (2022). Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 68(1), 91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
Chicago Kalender Hülya,UZUNER Kubilay,ŞİMŞEK Deniz,BAYRAM ISMAIL Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 68, no.1 (2022): 91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
MLA Kalender Hülya,UZUNER Kubilay,ŞİMŞEK Deniz,BAYRAM ISMAIL Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol.68, no.1, 2022, ss.91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
AMA Kalender H,UZUNER K,ŞİMŞEK D,BAYRAM I Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2022; 68(1): 91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
Vancouver Kalender H,UZUNER K,ŞİMŞEK D,BAYRAM I Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2022; 68(1): 91 - 99. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
IEEE Kalender H,UZUNER K,ŞİMŞEK D,BAYRAM I "Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index." Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 68, ss.91 - 99, 2022. 10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904
ISNAD Kalender, Hülya vd. "Comparison of ankle force, mobility, flexibility, and plantar pressure values in athletes according to foot posture index". Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 68/1 (2022), 91-99. https://doi.org/10.5606/tftrd.2022.4904