Title

新式簡易足弓測量系統之信效度考驗

Translated Titles

Evaluating the Reliability and Validity of a New and Convcnient Arch Measurement System

DOI

10.6222/pej.4403.201109.1105

Authors

石翔至(Hsiang-Chih Shih);謝仕福(Shih-Fu Hsieh);林冠綸(Guan-Lun Lin);相子元(Tzyy-Yuang Shiang)

Key Words

足印參數 ; 足弓高度 ; 足弓指標 ; 足弓角度 ; footprint parameters ; arch height ; arch index ; arch angle

PublicationName

體育學報

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

44卷3期(2011 / 09 / 01)

Page #

381 - 391

Content Language

繁體中文

Chinese Abstract

Purpose: The height of the medial longitudinal arch is one of the most important factors to describe foot structure. In particular, people with flat foot and high arch foot have higher injury rate. Footprint is a convenient way to determine foot structure. Current footprint measurement devices use electronic sensor or ink to obtain the footprint which either the analysis process is too complex or the ink is not environmental friendly. Therefore, a new footprint measurement device was developed to determine foot structure without using ink. In order to confirm the accuracy and reliability of this new device, this study tried to determine the correlation between different footprint measurement devices. Methods: 78 footprints were collected from the 39 subjects (7 males, 32 females). The mean age was 22.3±1.8 years, mean height was 162.1±8.1 cm, and mean weight was 56.5±11.6 kg. Subjects were measured two times on each foot by both the new device and traditional ink footprint device. Then the footprint images were scanned into the computer using Sigmascan Pro 5 software to analyze arch index and arch angle. Data were expressed as Mean SD, all statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS The Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to determine the correlation between two measurement devices. Statistical significant level was set at α=.01. Results: The correlation coefficients between new footprint and traditional ink footprint devices were 0.830 (p<.01) for arch index, 0.628 (p<.01) for arch angle. Previous studies reported high reliability for using footprint parameters to predict arch height. Therefore, the footprint parameter obtained from this new measurement device can be used to predict arch height and other foot structure parameters. Conclusion: New approach to measure footprint has significant correlation with the traditional ink footprint device. This result shows promising future in clinical applications to use this new footprint device which is more convenient and environmentally-friendly and easier to measure than the traditional ink footprint device. In order to provide more evidence to support this new device, more subjects and direct measurement of arch height should be analyzed in future study.

English Abstract

Purpose: The height of the medial longitudinal arch is one of the most important factors to describe foot structure. In particular, people with flat foot and high arch foot have higher injury rate. Footprint is a convenient way to determine foot structure. Current footprint measurement devices use electronic sensor or ink to obtain the footprint which either the analysis process is too complex or the ink is not environmental friendly. Therefore, a new footprint measurement device was developed to determine foot structure without using ink. In order to confirm the accuracy and reliability of this new device, this study tried to determine the correlation between different footprint measurement devices. Methods: 78 footprints were collected from the 39 subjects (7 males, 32 females). The mean age was 22.3±1.8 years, mean height was 162.1±8.1 cm, and mean weight was 56.5±11.6 kg. Subjects were measured two times on each foot by both the new device and traditional ink footprint device. Then the footprint images were scanned into the computer using Sigmascan Pro 5 software to analyze arch index and arch angle. Data were expressed as Mean SD, all statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS The Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to determine the correlation between two measurement devices. Statistical significant level was set at α=.01. Results: The correlation coefficients between new footprint and traditional ink footprint devices were 0.830 (p<.01) for arch index, 0.628 (p<.01) for arch angle. Previous studies reported high reliability for using footprint parameters to predict arch height. Therefore, the footprint parameter obtained from this new measurement device can be used to predict arch height and other foot structure parameters. Conclusion: New approach to measure footprint has significant correlation with the traditional ink footprint device. This result shows promising future in clinical applications to use this new footprint device which is more convenient and environmentally-friendly and easier to measure than the traditional ink footprint device. In order to provide more evidence to support this new device, more subjects and direct measurement of arch height should be analyzed in future study.

Topic Category 社會科學 > 體育學
Reference
  1. 蔣至傑、王博民、駱榮欽、陳俊忠(2005)。足弓形態與下肢傷害之相關性。北體學報,13,179-187。
    連結:
  2. Clarke, H. H. (1933). An objective method of measuring the height of the longitudinal arch in foot examination. Research Quarterly, 4, 99-107.
  3. Irwin, L. W. (1937). A study of the tendency of school children to develop flat-footedness. Research Quarterly, 8, 46-53.
  4. Schwatz, L., Britten, R. H., & Thompson, L. R. (1928). Studies in physical development and posture. (Report No. 179). U. S. Public Health Bulletin. Washington, DC: U. S.Government.
  5. Cavanagh,P.R.,Rodgers,M.M.(1987).The arch index: A useful measure from footprint.Journal of Biomechanics,20(5),547-551.
  6. Cobey,J.C.,Sella,E.(1981).Standardizing methods of measurement of foot shape by including the effects of subtalar rotation.Foot & Ankle,2,30-36.
  7. Gilmour,J.C.,Burns,Y.(2001).The measurement of the medial longitudinal arch in children.Foot & Ankle International,22(6),493-498.
  8. Hawes,M.R.,Nachbauer,W.,Sovak,D.,Nigg,B.M.(1992).Footprint parameters as a measure of arch height.Foot & Ankle,13(1),22-26.
  9. Kaye,R.A.,Jahss,M.H.(1991).Tibialis posterior: A review of anatomy and biomechanics in relation to support of the medial longitudinal arch.Foot & Ankle,11(4),244-247.
  10. Ludwig,O.(1995).A system of orthopaedic medicine.London, England:WB Saunders.
  11. Menz,H.B.,Morris,M.E.(2005).Footwear characteristics and foot problems in older people.Gerontology,51,346-351.
  12. Razeghi,M.,Batt,M.E.(2002).Foot type classification: A critical review of current methods.Gait & Posture,15(2),82-91.
  13. Shiang,T.Y.,Lee,S.H.,Lee,S.J.,Chu,W.C.(1998).Evaluating different footprint parameters as a predictor of arch height.IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology,17(6),62-66.
  14. Williams,D.S.,McClay,I.S.,Hamill,J.(2001).Arch structure and injury patterns in runner.Clinical Biomechanics,16,341-347.
Times Cited
  1. 劉妍秀(Yen-Hsiu Liu);謝富秀(Fu-Hsiu Hsieh);寧玉麟(Yu-Lin Ning);史麗珠(Lai-Chu See)(2012)。技擊反應動作時間目標量測系統改良及信效度評估。體育學報。45(2)。93-101。 
  2. 沈姍蓉(2016)。工作場所健康風險評估實證研究。中山醫學大學職業安全衛生學系碩士班學位論文。2016。1-118。