year 9, Issue 2 (Summer 2021)                   Ann Appl Sport Sci 2021, 9(2): 0-0 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Song J, Park S, Lee M. The Comparison of the Difference in Foot Pressure, Ground Reaction Force, and Balance Ability According to the Foot Arch Height in Young Adults. Ann Appl Sport Sci 2021; 9 (2)
1- Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate School, Daejeon University, Republic of Korea
2- Department of Physical Therapy, Daejeon University, Republic of Korea , mmlee@dkju.kt
Abstract:   (3469 Views)
Background. Human feet have important roles in supporting, moving and balancing the body. The feet must not only support the weight of the body but must also have the elasticity to absorb the burden associated with supporting excessive body weight.
Objectives. The purpose of this study was to compare the difference of foot pressure, ground reaction force, and balance ability according to change of the foot arch during the weight loading.
Methods. Total 60 healthy young adults were divided into flexible flat foot group (FFFG, n = 30) and normal foot arch group (NFAG, n = 30) by screening navicular drop test. To compare the foot pressure, the rate of change was calculated by measuring the foot contact area when walking against the foot contact area when standing. The ground reaction force measurement was performed to calculate the contact time of the foot, vertical force peak, and total GRF time-integral value during walking. Besides, a one-leg standing test was performed to measure postural instability according to the height of the foot arch.
Results. The FFFG showed a significantly higher contact area than that of the NFAG. Also, there was a significant increase in contact area ratio in FFFG (p < 0.05). The vertical force peak results revealed no significant differences between the two groups. However, for contact time and total GRF time-integral values, the FFFG values were higher than those for the NFAG (p < 0.05). The FFFG had significantly greater COP, velocity, COP path length, and area values than those of the NFAG (p < 0.05).
Conclusion. These results show that the flexible flat foot may reduce energy efficiency and increase instability during the dynamic performance and has a high risk of causing secondary problems.
Full-Text [PDF 514 kb]   (2044 Downloads)    
  • The normal posture alignment of the feet and lower limbs, as well as the stability of the feet, directly affects our body stability and walking ability in our daily lives. Therefore, it is necessary to check the condition of the foot arch to prevent secondary musculoskeletal problems caused by deformation of the foot arch.

Type of Study: Original Article | Subject: Kinesiology and Sport Injuries
Received: 2020/09/9 | Accepted: 2020/11/25

1. Maffulli N, Tallon C, Wong J, Peng Lim K, Bleakney R. Early weightbearing and ankle mobilization after open repair of acute midsubstance tears of the Achilles tendon. America J Sport Med. 2003;31(5):692-700. [DOI:10.1177/03635465030310051001] [PMID]
2. Yi-Wen C, Wei H, Hong-Wen W, Yen-Chen C, Horng-Chaung H. Measurements of foot arch in standing, level walking, vertical jump and sprint start. 2010.
3. Boozari S, Jamshidi AA, Sanjari MA, Jafari H. Effect of functional fatigue on vertical ground-reaction force in individuals with flat feet. J Sport Rehabilit. 2013;22(3):177-183. [DOI:10.1123/jsr.22.3.177] [PMID]
4. Giza E, Cush G, Schon LC. The flexible flatfoot in the adult. Foot Ankle Clinic. 2007;12(2):251-271. [DOI:10.1016/j.fcl.2007.03.008] [PMID]
5. Abousayed MM, Alley MC, Shakked R, Rosenbaum AJ. Adult-acquired flatfoot deformity: etiology, diagnosis, and management. JBJS reviews. 2017;5(8):e7. [DOI:10.2106/JBJS.RVW.16.00116] [PMID]
6. Khamis S, Yizhar Z. Effect of feet hyperpronation on pelvic alignment in a standing position. Gait & posture. 2007;25(1):127-134. [DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.02.005] [PMID]
7. Mosca VS. Flexible flatfoot in children and adolescents. J Children's Orthopaedics. 2010;4(2):107-121. [DOI:10.1007/s11832-010-0239-9] [PMID] [PMCID]
8. Prachgosin T, Chong DYR, Leelasamran W, Smithmaitrie P, Chatpun S. Medial longitudinal arch biomechanics evaluation during gait in subjects with flexible flatfoot. Acta Bioengin Biomechanic. 2015;17(4).
9. El O, Akcali O, Kosay C, Kaner B, Arslan Y, Sagol E, et al. Flexible flatfoot and related factors in primary school children: a report of a screening study. Rheumatol Int. 2006;26(11):1050-1053. [DOI:10.1007/s00296-006-0128-1] [PMID]
10. Hunt AE, Smith RM, Torode M, Keenan AM. Inter-segment foot motion and ground reaction forces over the stance phase of walking. Clinic Biomechanic. 2001;16(7):592-600. [DOI:10.1016/S0268-0033(01)00040-7]
11. Lee MS, Vanore JV, Thomas JL, Catanzariti AR, Kogler G, Kravitz SR, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of adult flatfoot. J Foot Ankle Surger. 2005;44(2):78-113. [DOI:10.1053/j.jfas.2004.12.001] [PMID]
12. Perry J, Burnfield JM. Gait analysis: normal and pathological function. 2nd. Thorofare, NJ: Slack Incorporated. 2010.
13. Schmid M, Conforto S, Camomilla V, Cappozzo A, D'alessio T. The sensitivity of posturographic parameters to acquisition settings. Med Engin Physic. 2002;24(9):623-631. [DOI:10.1016/S1350-4533(02)00046-2]
14. Brody DM. Techniques in the evaluation and treatment of the injured runner. Orthopedic Clinic North America. 1982;13(3):541-558. [DOI:10.1016/S0030-5898(20)30252-2]
15. Vicenzino B, Griffiths SR, Griffiths LA, Hadley A. Effect of antipronation tape and temporary orthotic on vertical navicular height before and after exercise. J Orthopaedic Sport Physic Therap. 2000;30(6):333-339. [DOI:10.2519/jospt.2000.30.6.333] [PMID]
16. Cote KP, Brunet ME, II BMG, Shultz SJ. Effects of pronated and supinated foot postures on static and dynamic postural stability. J Athletic Train. 2005;40(1):41.
17. Camargos MB, Palmeira AS, Fachin-Martins E. Cross-cultural adaptation to Brazilian portuguese of the waterloo footedness questionnaire-revised: WFQ-R-Brazil. Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria. 2017;75(10):727-735. [DOI:10.1590/0004-282x20170139] [PMID]
18. Abujaber S, Gillispie G, Marmon A, Zeni Jr J. Validity of the Nintendo Wii Balance Board to assess weight bearing asymmetry during sit-to-stand and return-to-sit task. Gait Posture. 2015;41(2):676-682. [DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.01.023] [PMID] [PMCID]
19. Barrentine SW, Fleisig GS, Johnson H, Woolley TW. Ground reaction forces and torques of professional and amateur golfers. Science and Golf II: Taylor & Francis; 2002. p. 58-67. [DOI:10.4324/9780203474709-10]
20. Yang S, Oh Y, Jeon Y, Park D. Test-retest reliability of sit-to-stand and gait assessment using the wii balance board. Physical Therapy Korea. 2016;23(3):40-47. [DOI:10.12674/ptk.2016.23.3.040]
21. Howells BE, Clark RA, Ardern CL, Bryant AL, Feller JA, Whitehead TS, et al. The assessment of postural control and the influence of a secondary task in people with anterior cruciate ligament reconstructed knees using a Nintendo Wii Balance Board. British J Sport Med. 2013;47(14):914-919. [DOI:10.1136/bjsports-2012-091525] [PMID]
22. Park DS, Lee GC. Validity and reliability of balance assessment software using the Nintendo Wii balance board: usability and validation. J Neuroengin Rehabilit. 2014;11(1):99. [DOI:10.1186/1743-0003-11-99] [PMID] [PMCID]
23. Headlee DL, Leonard JL, Hart JM, Ingersoll CD, Hertel J. Fatigue of the plantar intrinsic foot muscles increases navicular drop. J Electromyograph Kinesiol. 2008;18(3):420-425. [DOI:10.1016/j.jelekin.2006.11.004] [PMID]
24. Aenumulapalli A, Kulkarni MM, Gandotra AR. Prevalence of flexible flat foot in adults: A cross-sectional study. J Clinic Diagnostic Res JCDR. 2017;11(6):AC17. [DOI:10.7860/JCDR/2017/26566.10059] [PMID] [PMCID]
25. Basmajian JV, Stecko G. The role of muscles in arch support of the foot: an electromyographic study. JBJS. 1963;45(6):1184-1190. [DOI:10.2106/00004623-196345060-00006]
26. Bhoir T, Anap DB, Diwate A. Prevalence of flat foot among 18-25 years old physiotherapy students: cross sectional study. India J Basic Appl Med Res. 2014;3(4):272-278.
27. Rao S, Carter S. Regional plantar pressure during walking, stair ascent and descent. Gait Posture. 2012;36(2):265-270. [DOI:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.03.006] [PMID]
28. Zhai JN, Wang J, Qiu YS. Plantar pressure differences among adults with mild flexible flatfoot, severe flexible flatfoot and normal foot when walking on level surface, walking upstairs and downstairs. J Physic Therap Sci. 2017;29(4):641-646. [DOI:10.1589/jpts.29.641] [PMID] [PMCID]
29. Brodsky JW, Zubak JJ, Pollo FE, Baum BS. Preliminary gait analysis results after posterior tibial tendon reconstruction: a prospective study. Foot Ankle Int. 2004;25(2):96-100. [DOI:10.1177/107110070402500210] [PMID]
30. Keller TS, Weisberger AM, Ray JL, Hasan SS, Shiavi RG, Spengler DM. Relationship between vertical ground reaction force and speed during walking, slow jogging, and running. Clinic Biomechanic. 1996;11(5):253-259. [DOI:10.1016/0268-0033(95)00068-2]
31. Alavi-Mehr SM, Jafarnezhadgero AA, Salari-Esker F, Zago M. Acute effect of foot orthoses on frequency domain of ground reaction forces in male children with flexible flatfeet during walking. Foot. 2018;37:77-84. [DOI:10.1016/j.foot.2018.05.003] [PMID]
32. Richards J. Biomechanics in clinic and research: Churchill Livingstone; 2008.
33. Okamura K, Kanai S, Hasegawa M, Otsuka A, Oki S. The effect of additional activation of the plantar intrinsic foot muscles on foot dynamics during gait. Foot. 2018;34:1-5. [DOI:10.1016/j.foot.2017.08.002] [PMID]
34. Sherman KP. The foot in sport. British J Sport Med. 1999;33(1):6. [DOI:10.1136/bjsm.33.1.6] [PMID] [PMCID]
35. Tahmasebi R, Karimi MT, Satvati B, Fatoye F. Evaluation of standing stability in individuals with flatfeet. Foot Ankle Specialist. 2015;8(3):168-174. [DOI:10.1177/1938640014557075] [PMID]
36. Abe D, Muraki S, Yasukouchi A. Ergonomic effects of load carriage on the upper and lower back on metabolic energy cost of walking. Applied Ergonomic. 2008;39(3):392-398. [DOI:10.1016/j.apergo.2007.07.001] [PMID]
37. Hong Y, Li JX, Fong DTP. Effect of prolonged walking with backpack loads on trunk muscle activity and fatigue in children. J Electromyograph Kinesiol. 2008;18(6):990-996. [DOI:10.1016/j.jelekin.2007.06.013] [PMID]

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Annals of Applied Sport Science

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb