Dynamic plantar pressure proles of South African university students

Abstract

Background. Footscan technology allows for assessment of injury risk and walking mechanics, yet there is a dearth of normative data pertaining to the normal, injury-free foot in a South African (SA) context. Objective. To generate normative tables from plantar pressure pro le data gathered from students at an SA university. Methods. e RS Footscan (RSscan, Belgium) system was used to measure the plantar pressure values of the foot. Ten anatomical landmarks of the foot were analysed: the hallux, lateral toes, ve metatarsal heads, midfoot, and medial and lateral heel. ese ten areas were grouped into one of three regions: forefoot, midfoot and heel. A total of 180 participants were subdivided as follows: gender (males, n=90; females, n=90); race (black, n=60; white, n=60; coloured, n=60). Each race group comprised 30 males and 30 females. Results. Of the ten individual plantar pressure areas, the second and third metatarsal heads demonstrated the highest mean peak plantar pressure values. Of the three regions, the heel region was ascribed with the largest plantar pressure values. Black females, coloured males and coloured females yielded the highest pressure values, especially under the midfoot region of the foot. Black and white males and white females exhibited the lowest pressure under the foot, especially under the midfoot region. Conclusion. e plantar pressure pro le data generated in this study could serve to provide clinicians with a frame of reference when evaluating participants within the age range of 18 -30 years.

A Novel Wearable Foot and Ankle Monitoring System for the Assessment of Gait Biomechanics

“…As for another example, Cho et al deploy only three sensors onto the metatarsal arch, three sensors onto the heel and an additional sensor onto the medial arch as an indicator of flat foot [14], as illustrated in Figure 5b. On the other hand, the solutions proposed by Aqueveque et al in [15] and illustrated in Figure 5c, as well as the solution proposed by Kramer et al in [16] and illustrated in Figure 5d, deploy an additional sensor onto the lesser toes. Additionally, the solution of Aqueveque et al keeps the FSR on the medial arch for flat foot indication.…”

“…The muscular activity for the lower kinetic chain throughout different phases of the gait cycle during the stance phase is listed in Table 1, followed by the muscular activity throughout the swing phase listed in Table 2. (a) (b) (c) (d) Figure 5. Solutions of pressure sensor deployment on the footprint for dynamic assessment: (a) assessment of the footprint medial line with sensors deployed onto the hallux, metatarsal arch, lateral arch and heel respectively [13], (b) additional sensor deployed on the medial arch for flatfoot identification [14], (c) additional sensor deployed on the lesser toes and medial arch for flatfoot identification [15], (d) additional sensor deployed on the lesser toes [16]. In the present work, we have decided upon the assessment of the tibialis anteriorfrom the pretibial muscle group, and the gastrocnemius-from the calf muscle group.…”

“…The gastrocnemius Figure 5. Solutions of pressure sensor deployment on the footprint for dynamic assessment: (a) assessment of the footprint medial line with sensors deployed onto the hallux, metatarsal arch, lateral arch and heel respectively [13], (b) additional sensor deployed on the medial arch for flatfoot identification [14], (c) additional sensor deployed on the lesser toes and medial arch for flatfoot identification [15], (d) additional sensor deployed on the lesser toes [16].…”