British Journal of Medicine and Medical Research, ISSN: 2231-0614,Vol.: 10, Issue.: 1
Biomechanics and Clinical Interactions in Podiatry Assessment
João Martiniano1,2, Ivo Roupa1, Guillermo Lafuente2 and João Abrantes1* 1Mov Lab, Laboratório de Interacções e Interfaces, CICANT, Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Lisboa, Portugal. 2Departamento de Podologia, Facultad de Enfermeria, Fisioterapia y Podologia, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
João Martiniano1,2, Ivo Roupa1, Guillermo Lafuente2 and João Abrantes1*
1Mov Lab, Laboratório de Interacções e Interfaces, CICANT, Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, Lisboa, Portugal.
2Departamento de Podologia, Facultad de Enfermeria, Fisioterapia y Podologia, Universidad de Sevilla, Sevilla, Spain.
(1) Chan Shen, Department of Biostatistics, MD Anderson Cancer Center, University of Texas, USA.
(1) Anonymous, Ningbo University, China.
(2) Anonymous, Federal University of Pará, Brazil.
Complete Peer review History: http://sciencedomain.org/review-history/10346
Background: Most foot joints have three degrees of freedom. Kinematics is important to understand gait cycle feet joint interactions. Daily clinical practice doesn’t allow immediate access to specialized laboratories where specific developments contribute to progress of podiatry knowledge. The aim of this study is to contribute to the knowledge of the interactions between biomechanical and clinical assessments.
Methods: Five healthy subjects underwent two types of assessment. Clinical: Anamnesis; passive joint by goniometry; plantar pressure features and Centre of Pressure (COP) displacement (RsScan®). Biomechanical: In the Laboratory, subjects walked 7 metres (3 trials); the data/percentage stance phase graphics were displayed. Ankle and Forefoot/Hallux dorsi/plantarflexion; Hindfoot/Tibia and Hindfoot/Forefoot eversion/inversion, angles were measured. Ground reaction force (Fz) (AMTI® at 1250 Hz) was used to determine 5 stance phase events (initial contact, loading response, Midstance, Terminal stance, Preswing) collected with 10 Mx1.3 Vicon® (250Hz) and 3D Oxford Foot Model.
Results: Clinical assessments have shown that joint angles are in accordance with literature. The data/percentage stance phase graphics show similar patterns to the literature. Every 5 subject’s angle data show the personalized quantification demonstrated in the text tables.
Conclusion: Despite the absence of statistical reasoning due to the reduced sample size, the obtained data are consistent with the literature’s references. The clinical and biomechanical assessments show different information, although they complement each other. The biomechanical information knowledge gathered is an added value to the clinician and to the evidence-based practice.
Biomechanics; foot model; clinical interactions; podiatry assessment.
Full Article - PDF Page 1-20
DOI : 10.9734/BJMMR/2015/19153Review History Comments