Measurements used to characterize the foot and the medial longitudinal arch: Reliability and validity
Measurements used to characterize the foot and the medial longitudinal arch: Reliability and validity
复制标题
DOI：
10.1093/ptj/80.9.864
复制
发表时间：
2000-09-01
期刊：
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
McClay, IS
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Williams, DS;McClay, IS
背景和目的。足部内侧纵弓结构的异常通常被认为是损伤的诱发因素。本研究的目的是比较用于表征足部各个方面的几种测量方法的可靠性和有效性，包括内侧纵弓。测量102英尺（51名受试者的双脚）以建立参考数据库。从该组中，20英尺（10名受试者的双脚）的子集用于确定测试者间和测试者内的可靠性。另一个子集的10只脚（10名受试者的右脚）的X光片用于确定有效性。方法.在2种站立条件下进行5次足部测量：10%负重和90%负重。结果测试者间和测试者内测量的组内相关系数（ICC）在0.480和0.995之间。在10%的负重测试中，最可靠的方法是将舟骨高度除以足部。长度为承重的10%。然而，该测量在90%的承重中产生高度不可靠的测量。最有效的测量值是舟高除以截足长，10%负重时舟高除以足长，90%负重时舟高除以足根长，50%足长时的足背高除以截足长显示出较高的被试间信度（ICC= 0.811在10%的负重中，ICC= 0.848在90%的负重中）和有效性（ICC= 0.844在10%的负重中，ICC= 0.851在90%的负重中）。结论和讨论。这些数据表明，在测试的测量中，临床评估10%和90%负重时足弓高度的最可靠和有效方法是将50%足长处的点和高度除以截短足长。
Background and Purpose. Abnormality in the structure of the medial longitudinal arch of the foot is commonly thought to be a predisposing factor to injury. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the reliability and validity of several measurements used to characterize various aspects of the foot, including the medial longitudinal arch. Subjects. One hundred two feet (both feet of 51 subjects) were measured to establish a reference database. From this group, a subset of 20 feet (both feet of 10 subjects) was used to determine intertester and intratester reliability. Radiographs of a further subset of 10 feet (right feet of 10 subjects) were used to determine validity. Methods. Five foot measurements were taken in 2 stance conditions: 10% of weight bearing and 90% of weight bearing. Results. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) for intertester and intratester measurements were between .480 and .995. The most reliable method of characterizing arch type in 10% of weight bearing between testers was dividing navicular height by foot. length in 10% of weight bearing. However, this measure yielded highly unreliable measurements in 90% of weight bearing. The most valid measurements were navicular height divided by truncated foot length, navicular height divided by foot length in 10% of weight bearing, and navicular height divided by root length in 90% of weight bearing, Dorsum height at 50% of foot length divided by truncated foot length showed relatively high intertester reliability (ICC=.811 in 10% of weight bearing, ICC=.848 in 90% of weight bearing) and validity (ICC=.844 in 10% of weight bearing, ICC=.851 in 90% of weight bearing). Conclusion and Discussion. These data suggest that, of the measures tested, the most reliable and valid method of clinically assessing arch height across 10% and 90% of weight bearing was dividing the dot-sum height at 50% of foot length by truncated foot length.