Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Intra-rater repeatability of the Oxford foot model in healthy children in different stages of the foot roll over process during gait

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{13e70086664746d3ac9b6b7791ebf2f3,
title = "Intra-rater repeatability of the Oxford foot model in healthy children in different stages of the foot roll over process during gait",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: The repeatability of the Oxford foot model has been reported, but possible variations in the repeatability during the foot roll over process have not been examined. The aim of this study was to determine the relative and absolute repeatability of the model for each stage of the foot roll over process during gait and to compare foot kinematic data from this study with that from another centre as a preliminary examination of the model's inter-centre repeatability and validity. METHOD: Eight healthy children were tested twice at the gait laboratory. Foot kinematics from this study were plotted against those from an earlier repeatability study and repeatability statistics calculated for the three rockers of stance phase and swing phase. RESULTS: Foot kinematics from this study and an earlier repeatability study produced similar kinematic patterns and joint angle ranges, but there were offsets in the absolute joint angles in the frontal and transverse planes. Relative and absolute repeatability were best in the sagittal plane (flexion/extension) with the poorest repeatability in the transverse plane (rotation and abduction/adduction). There was little difference in repeatability between the three rockers. Typical error of measurement varied between planes and segments from 0.9 degrees for maximum forefoot dorsiflexion in second rocker to 8.6 degrees for maximum hindfoot internal rotation in first rocker. DISCUSSION: Repeatability varied markedly between planes and segments but was consistent throughout the gait cycle. Further studies are needed to determine the inter-centre repeatability and validity of the model.",
keywords = "Biomechanics, Child, Female, Foot, Forefoot, Human, Gait, Humans, Male, Models, Biological, Observer Variation, Range of Motion, Articular, Reference Values, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity",
author = "Curtis, {D J} and J Bencke and Stebbins, {J A} and B Stansfield",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.02.013",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "118--21",
journal = "Gait & posture",
issn = "0966-6362",
publisher = "Elsevier BV",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Intra-rater repeatability of the Oxford foot model in healthy children in different stages of the foot roll over process during gait

AU - Curtis, D J

AU - Bencke, J

AU - Stebbins, J A

AU - Stansfield, B

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - BACKGROUND: The repeatability of the Oxford foot model has been reported, but possible variations in the repeatability during the foot roll over process have not been examined. The aim of this study was to determine the relative and absolute repeatability of the model for each stage of the foot roll over process during gait and to compare foot kinematic data from this study with that from another centre as a preliminary examination of the model's inter-centre repeatability and validity. METHOD: Eight healthy children were tested twice at the gait laboratory. Foot kinematics from this study were plotted against those from an earlier repeatability study and repeatability statistics calculated for the three rockers of stance phase and swing phase. RESULTS: Foot kinematics from this study and an earlier repeatability study produced similar kinematic patterns and joint angle ranges, but there were offsets in the absolute joint angles in the frontal and transverse planes. Relative and absolute repeatability were best in the sagittal plane (flexion/extension) with the poorest repeatability in the transverse plane (rotation and abduction/adduction). There was little difference in repeatability between the three rockers. Typical error of measurement varied between planes and segments from 0.9 degrees for maximum forefoot dorsiflexion in second rocker to 8.6 degrees for maximum hindfoot internal rotation in first rocker. DISCUSSION: Repeatability varied markedly between planes and segments but was consistent throughout the gait cycle. Further studies are needed to determine the inter-centre repeatability and validity of the model.

AB - BACKGROUND: The repeatability of the Oxford foot model has been reported, but possible variations in the repeatability during the foot roll over process have not been examined. The aim of this study was to determine the relative and absolute repeatability of the model for each stage of the foot roll over process during gait and to compare foot kinematic data from this study with that from another centre as a preliminary examination of the model's inter-centre repeatability and validity. METHOD: Eight healthy children were tested twice at the gait laboratory. Foot kinematics from this study were plotted against those from an earlier repeatability study and repeatability statistics calculated for the three rockers of stance phase and swing phase. RESULTS: Foot kinematics from this study and an earlier repeatability study produced similar kinematic patterns and joint angle ranges, but there were offsets in the absolute joint angles in the frontal and transverse planes. Relative and absolute repeatability were best in the sagittal plane (flexion/extension) with the poorest repeatability in the transverse plane (rotation and abduction/adduction). There was little difference in repeatability between the three rockers. Typical error of measurement varied between planes and segments from 0.9 degrees for maximum forefoot dorsiflexion in second rocker to 8.6 degrees for maximum hindfoot internal rotation in first rocker. DISCUSSION: Repeatability varied markedly between planes and segments but was consistent throughout the gait cycle. Further studies are needed to determine the inter-centre repeatability and validity of the model.

KW - Biomechanics

KW - Child

KW - Female

KW - Foot

KW - Forefoot, Human

KW - Gait

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Models, Biological

KW - Observer Variation

KW - Range of Motion, Articular

KW - Reference Values

KW - Reproducibility of Results

KW - Sensitivity and Specificity

U2 - 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.02.013

DO - 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.02.013

M3 - Journal article

VL - 30

SP - 118

EP - 121

JO - Gait & posture

JF - Gait & posture

SN - 0966-6362

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 32546447