Arch height change during sit-to-stand: an alternative for the navicular drop test

Mcpoil, Cornwall, Medoff Lynn, Vicenzino Bill, Forsberg Kelly, Hilz, Hilz Dana

Description

A study was conducted to determine the reliability and validity of a new foot mobility assessment method that utilizes digital images to measure the change in dorsal arch height measured at 50% of the length of the foot during the Sit-to-Stand test. Methods Two hundred – seventy five healthy participants participated in the study. The medial aspect of each foot was photographed with a digital camera while each participant stood with 50% body weight on each foot as well as in sitting for a non-weight bearing image. The dorsal arch height was measured at 50% of the total length of the foot on both weight bearing and non-weight bearing images to determine the change in dorsal arch height. The reliability and validity of the measurements were then determined. Results The mean difference in dorsal arch height between non-weight bearing and weight bearing was 10 millimeters. The change in arch height during the Sit-to-Stand test was shown to have good to high levels of intra- and inter-reliability as well as validity using x-rays as the criterion measure. Conclusion While the navicular drop test has been widely used as a clinical method to assess foot mobility, poor levels of inter-rater reliability have been reported. The results of the current study suggest that the change in dorsal arch height during the Sit-to-Stand test offers the clinician a reliable and valid alternative to the navicular drop test.

Informations

• Publié par: biomed
• Publié le: 01 janvier 2008
• Nombre de lectures: 20
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

Journal of Foot and Ankle Research

BioMedCentral

Open Access Research Arch height change during sit-to-stand: an alternative for the navicular drop test 1 1 2 3 Thomas G McPoil* , Mark W Cornwall , Lynn Medoff , Bill Vicenzino , 1 1 Kelly Forsberg and Dana Hilz

1 2 Address: Gait Research Laboratory, Program in Physical Therapy, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona, USA, Medoff Physical Therapy, 3 Flagstaff, Arizona, USA and Department of Physiotherapy, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia Email: Thomas G McPoil*  [e-mail]; Mark W Cornwall  [e-mail]; Lynn Medoff  [e-mail]; Bill Vicenzino  [e-mail]; Kelly Forsberg  [e-mail]; Dana Hilz  [e-mail] * Corresponding author

Published: 28 July 2008 Received: 17 April 2008 Accepted: 28 July 2008 Journal of Foot and Ankle Research2008,1:3 doi:10.1186/1757-1146-1-3 This article is available from: http://www.jfootankleres.com/content/1/1/3 © 2008 McPoil et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract Background:A study was conducted to determine the reliability and validity of a new foot mobility assessment method that utilizes digital images to measure the change in dorsal arch height measured at 50% of the length of the foot during the Sit-to-Stand test.

Methods:Two hundred – seventy five healthy participants participated in the study. The medial aspect of each foot was photographed with a digital camera while each participant stood with 50% body weight on each foot as well as in sitting for a non-weight bearing image. The dorsal arch height was measured at 50% of the total length of the foot on both weight bearing and non-weight bearing images to determine the change in dorsal arch height. The reliability and validity of the measurements were then determined.

Results:The mean difference in dorsal arch height between non-weight bearing and weight bearing was 10 millimeters. The change in arch height during the Sit-to-Stand test was shown to have good to high levels of intra- and inter-reliability as well as validity using x-rays as the criterion measure.

Conclusion:While the navicular drop test has been widely used as a clinical method to assess foot mobility, poor levels of inter-rater reliability have been reported. The results of the current study suggest that the change in dorsal arch height during the Sit-to-Stand test offers the clinician a reliable and valid alternative to the navicular drop test.

Background The navicular drop test (NDT) has been widely used as a clinical method to assess foot mobility. The NDT has also been associated with lower limb musculoskeletal injuries [13]. Brody was one of the first to describe the NDT and he noted that it was helpful in evaluating the amount of foot mobility, specifically pronation, in runners [4]. Brody stated that the NDT was performed with the patient

standing on a firm surface with the navicular bone marked bilaterally. The patient's subtalar joint was first placed in neutral position using palpation and the height of the navicular bone from the floor was marked on an index card placed on the medial aspect of the foot. The patient was then asked to relax their feet and the resulting lower position of the navicular bone was also marked on the card. To determine the degree of navicular drop, Brody

Page 1 of 11 (page number not for citation purposes)