- Title
- The relationship between foot and ankle joint flexibility measures and barefoot plantar pressures in healthy older adults: a cross-sectional study
- Creator
- McNab, Bonnie; Sadler, Sean; Lanting, Sean; Chuter, Vivienne
- Relation
- BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders Vol. 23, Issue 1, no. 729
- Publisher Link
- http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05618-w
- Publisher
- BioMed Central
- Resource Type
- journal article
- Date
- 2022
- Description
- Background: Restriction in foot and ankle joint range of motion, such as an ankle equinus, has been associated with increased plantar pressure and its complications. However, previous research is limited by its scope of measures and study populations. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between foot and ankle joint range of motion on barefoot plantar pressures during walking in healthy older adults. Methods: This cross-sectional study recruited 49 older adults. Participants underwent measures of foot (frst metatarsophalangeal dorsifexion range of motion, and navicular drop and drift) and ankle joint range of motion, foot posture, body mass index, and plantar pressure during barefoot walking. Spearman Rank Order Correlations were used to explore the relationship between foot and ankle measures, body mass index, and plantar pressure, with signifcant correlations explored in a hierarchical regression analysis. A Mann-Whitney U test was performed to compare plantar pressure values between those with and without ankle equinus per region of the foot. Results: Mean (SD) age and BMI were 72.4 years (5.2) and 29.8 kg/m2 (5.9) respectively. A total of 32 of the 49 participants (65%) identifed as female sex. Mean (SD) ankle joint range of motion was 32.7 (6.4) degrees with 17/49 (34.7%) participants classifed as having an ankle equinus (defned as <30 degrees of ankle joint dorsifexion range of motion). We found that an ankle equinus predicted a statistically signifcant amount of peak forefoot plantar pressure (p =0.03). Participants with an ankle equinus displayed signifcantly higher forefoot peak pressure 677.8 kPa (589.9 to 810.4) compared to those with no equinus 565.58 kPa (447.3 to 651.2), p =0.02. A statistically signifcant correlation was found between body mass index and midfoot peak pressure (p <0.01) and pressure-time integral (p <0.01). No other signifcant correlations were found. Conclusion: Clinicians should consider screening for an ankle equinus and body mass index as a simple way to identify which healthy older adults may be at risk of pressure-related complications in the mid- and forefoot.
- Subject
- ankle; equinus; foot; plantar pressure; older adults
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/1959.13/1487459
- Identifier
- uon:52150
- Identifier
- ISSN:1471-2474
- Rights
- © The Author(s) 2022. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
- Language
- eng
- Full Text
- Reviewed
- Hits: 997
- Visitors: 987
- Downloads: 1
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| View Details Download | ATTACHMENT02 | Publisher version (open access) | 941 KB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |