Repeatability in the assessment of multi-segment foot kinematics

Abstract

A recently published systematic review on 3D multi-segment foot models has illustrated the lack of repeatability studies providing evidence for appropriate clinical decision making. The aim of the current study was to assess the repeatability of the recently published model developed by Leardini et al. [10]. Foot kinematics of six healthy adults were analyzed through a repeated-measures design including two therapists with different levels of experience and four test sessions. For the majority of the parameters moderate or good repeatability was observed for the within-day and between-day sessions. A trend towards consistently higher within- and between-day variability was observed for the junior compared to the senior clinician. The mean inter-session variability of the relative 3D rotations ranged between 0.9-4.2° and 1.6-5.0° for respectively the senior and junior clinician whereas for the absolute angles this variability increased to respectively 2.0-6.2° and 2.6-7.8°. Mean inter-therapist standard deviations ranged between 2.2° and 6.5° for the relative 3D rotations and between 2.8° and 7.6° for the absolute 3D rotations. The ratio of inter-therapist to inter-trial errors ranged between 1.8 and 5.5 for the relative 3D rotations and between 2.4 and 9.7 for the absolute 3D rotations. Absolute angle representation of the planar angles was found to be more difficult. Observations from the current study indicate that an adequate normative database can be installed in gait laboratories, however, it should be stressed that experience of therapists is important and gait laboratories should therefore be encouraged to put effort in training their clinicians.

Comparison of foot segmental mobility and coupling during gait between patients with diabetes mellitus with and without neuropathy and adults without diabetes

“…It is also appropriate to reflect on the repeatability associated to the Rizzoli_3DMFM. The repeatability of the Rizzoli_3DMFM was recently reported in deformed and non-deformed feet (Deschamps et al, 2012a(Deschamps et al, , 2012b. As a rule of thumb, it can be stated that differences in absolute inter-segment angles should exceed five degrees before it can be considered relevant.…”

“…As a rule of thumb, it can be stated that differences in absolute inter-segment angles should exceed five degrees before it can be considered relevant. For the calculation of RoM during specific subphases, one has to consider a measurement error b2.0°for all 3D rotations (Deschamps et al, 2012a). Experience of therapists may also contribute to the magnitude of the error.…”

“…More recently, 3D multisegment foot models (3DMFMs) emerged allowing the quantification of the mobility of different foot segments during clinical gait analysis (Baker and Robb, 2006;Deschamps et al, 2011). The clinical usefulness of this method with respect to pathomechanical modelling has been underpinned with methodological as well as clinical studies in different patient populations (Deschamps et al, 2012a(Deschamps et al, , 2012bNess et al, 2008). So far, clinical usefulness of this segmental modelling in patients with DM has been explored by two different research groups (Rao et al, 2007;Sawacha et al, 2009).…”

Reliability and minimal detectable difference in multisegment foot kinematics during shod walking and running

“…This within-session reliability reflected the trial to trial consistency of participants' gait. A c c e p t e d M a n u s c r i p t 10 multisegment foot model [17][18][19]. The investigator who placed the markers in the current study was experienced in gait analysis.…”

Biomechanical Analysis of Achilles Tendon Stretch And Plantar Fascia Stretch In Plantar Fasciitis Treatment

“…Bone models were obtained from previous researches of our research group [17]. In recent researches, foot has been widely modelled as multiple segments while the number of the segments range from 2 to 4 [18][19][20][21][22]. This paper has divided the foot into 4 parts: rear-foot composed of calcaneus and talus, mid-foot composed of navicular, cuneiforms, cuboid, fore-mid foot consisted of first to fifth metatarsal, fore-foot composed of phalanges.…”