A foot structure study of new arch flexibility grading system based on three-dimensional arch volume

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Jun Liu , Miao Deng , Wei Wang , Xiang-Dong Liu , Lun Tao , Hong-Yi Xiang , Yan Xiong
{"title":"A foot structure study of new arch flexibility grading system based on three-dimensional arch volume","authors":"Jun Liu ,&nbsp;Miao Deng ,&nbsp;Wei Wang ,&nbsp;Xiang-Dong Liu ,&nbsp;Lun Tao ,&nbsp;Hong-Yi Xiang ,&nbsp;Yan Xiong","doi":"10.1016/j.cjtee.2023.09.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Different arch structures may cause different foot function injuries. In the past, the arch structure and flexibility of the foot were often defined by the height of the arch, and there was no three-dimensional (3D) structure classification method. In order to form a more complete 3D description, we propose a new classification system of arch volume flexibility (AVF), and then use this new classification system to investigate the relationship between the AVF and arch index (AI), and the arch height flexibility (AHF) and AI, respectively.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>It is proposed to recruit 180 young male adults for the test. We obtained arch volume and AI through 3D scanning and obtained the navicular height through manual measurement. Based on these data, we calculated the AHF and the AVF. Using the quintile method, these arches are divided into very stiff, stiff, neutral, flexible, and very flexible. According to AI value, all arches were divided into cavus, rectus, and planus. The distribution of AVF was compared using χ<sup>2</sup> goodness of fit test. The spearman correlation test was used to compare the AHF and AVF. A <em>p</em> &lt; 0.05 indicates that the difference is statistically significant.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>All participants' plantar data was obtained through 3D scanning, but only 159 of them were complete, so only 318 feet had valid data. The left AHF is (21.23 ± 12.91) mm/kN, and the right AHF is (21.71 ± 12.69) mm/kN. The AVF of the left foot arch is (207.35 ± 118.28) mm<sup>3</sup>/kg, while the right one is (203.00 ± 117.92) mm<sup>3</sup>/kg, and the total AVF of the arch was (205.17 ± 117.94) mm<sup>3</sup>/kg. There was no statistical difference in the AVF between the left and right feet for the same participant (<em>n</em> = 159, <em>p</em> = 0.654). In cavus, the percentage of arch with AVF is 21.4% (very stiff), 21.4% (stiff), 14.3% (neutral), 7.1% (flexible), and 35.7% (very flexible). In rectus, the percentage of arch with AVF is 23.9% (very stiff), 19.6% (stiff), 14.7% (neutral), 24.5% (flexible), and 17.2% (very flexible). In planus, the percentage of arch with AVF is 14.9% (very stiff), 20.6% (stiff), 27.0% (neutral), 16.3% (flexible), and 21.3% (very flexible). Moreover, the correlation between AHF and AVF is not significant (<em>p</em> = 0.060).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>In cavus, rectus, and planus, different AVF accounts different percentage, but the difference is not statistically significant. AVF is evenly distributed in the arches of the feet at different heights. We further found the relationship between AHF and AVF is not significant. As a 3D index, AVF may be able to describe the flexibility of the arch more comprehensively than AHF.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51555,"journal":{"name":"Chinese Journal of Traumatology","volume":"26 6","pages":"Pages 329-333"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1008127523000901/pdfft?md5=8c5b9078ad0e94d366c141918d081ebe&pid=1-s2.0-S1008127523000901-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chinese Journal of Traumatology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1008127523000901","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

Different arch structures may cause different foot function injuries. In the past, the arch structure and flexibility of the foot were often defined by the height of the arch, and there was no three-dimensional (3D) structure classification method. In order to form a more complete 3D description, we propose a new classification system of arch volume flexibility (AVF), and then use this new classification system to investigate the relationship between the AVF and arch index (AI), and the arch height flexibility (AHF) and AI, respectively.

Methods

It is proposed to recruit 180 young male adults for the test. We obtained arch volume and AI through 3D scanning and obtained the navicular height through manual measurement. Based on these data, we calculated the AHF and the AVF. Using the quintile method, these arches are divided into very stiff, stiff, neutral, flexible, and very flexible. According to AI value, all arches were divided into cavus, rectus, and planus. The distribution of AVF was compared using χ2 goodness of fit test. The spearman correlation test was used to compare the AHF and AVF. A p < 0.05 indicates that the difference is statistically significant.

Results

All participants' plantar data was obtained through 3D scanning, but only 159 of them were complete, so only 318 feet had valid data. The left AHF is (21.23 ± 12.91) mm/kN, and the right AHF is (21.71 ± 12.69) mm/kN. The AVF of the left foot arch is (207.35 ± 118.28) mm3/kg, while the right one is (203.00 ± 117.92) mm3/kg, and the total AVF of the arch was (205.17 ± 117.94) mm3/kg. There was no statistical difference in the AVF between the left and right feet for the same participant (n = 159, p = 0.654). In cavus, the percentage of arch with AVF is 21.4% (very stiff), 21.4% (stiff), 14.3% (neutral), 7.1% (flexible), and 35.7% (very flexible). In rectus, the percentage of arch with AVF is 23.9% (very stiff), 19.6% (stiff), 14.7% (neutral), 24.5% (flexible), and 17.2% (very flexible). In planus, the percentage of arch with AVF is 14.9% (very stiff), 20.6% (stiff), 27.0% (neutral), 16.3% (flexible), and 21.3% (very flexible). Moreover, the correlation between AHF and AVF is not significant (p = 0.060).

Conclusion

In cavus, rectus, and planus, different AVF accounts different percentage, but the difference is not statistically significant. AVF is evenly distributed in the arches of the feet at different heights. We further found the relationship between AHF and AVF is not significant. As a 3D index, AVF may be able to describe the flexibility of the arch more comprehensively than AHF.

基于三维拱体的新型拱柔度分级系统的足部结构研究
目的不同的足弓结构可能导致不同的足功能损伤。过去常以足弓高度来定义足弓结构和柔韧性,没有三维(3D)结构分类方法。为了形成更完整的三维描述,本文提出了一种新的弓体积柔韧性(AVF)分类体系,并利用该分类体系分别研究了AVF与弓指数(AI)、弓高度柔韧性(AHF)和AI之间的关系。方法拟招募成年青年男性180人进行试验。我们通过三维扫描获得弓体积和AI,通过人工测量获得舟骨高度。基于这些数据,我们计算了AHF和AVF。使用五分位法,这些弓分为非常僵硬、僵硬、中性、灵活和非常灵活。根据AI值,将所有足弓分为空腹、直腹、平腹。AVF分布比较采用χ2拟合优度检验。采用spearman相关检验比较AHF与AVF。A & p;0.05表示差异有统计学意义。结果所有参与者的足底数据均通过3D扫描获得,但只有159个足底数据完整,因此只有318个足底数据有效。左侧AHF为(21.23±12.91)mm/kN,右侧AHF为(21.71±12.69)mm/kN。左足弓AVF为(207.35±118.28)mm3/kg,右足弓AVF为(203.00±117.92)mm3/kg,足弓AVF总为(205.17±117.94)mm3/kg。同一受试者左右足AVF差异无统计学意义(n = 159, p = 0.654)。在凹窝中,AVF的比例分别为21.4%(非常僵硬)、21.4%(僵硬)、14.3%(中性)、7.1%(柔韧)和35.7%(非常柔韧)。在直肌中,AVF弓的比例分别为23.9%(非常僵硬)、19.6%(僵硬)、14.7%(中性)、24.5%(柔韧)和17.2%(非常柔韧)。扁平椎弓弓伴AVF的比例分别为14.9%(非常僵硬)、20.6%(僵硬)、27.0%(中性)、16.3%(柔韧)和21.3%(非常柔韧)。AHF与AVF的相关性不显著(p = 0.060)。结论在空腔肌、直肌、平肌中,不同部位AVF所占比例不同,但差异无统计学意义。AVF均匀分布于不同高度的足弓。我们进一步发现AHF和AVF之间的关系不显著。作为一种三维指标,AVF可能比AHF更能全面地描述弓的柔韧性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
4.80%
发文量
1707
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊介绍: Chinese Journal of Traumatology (CJT, ISSN 1008-1275) was launched in 1998 and is a peer-reviewed English journal authorized by Chinese Association of Trauma, Chinese Medical Association. It is multidisciplinary and designed to provide the most current and relevant information for both the clinical and basic research in the field of traumatic medicine. CJT primarily publishes expert forums, original papers, case reports and so on. Topics cover trauma system and management, surgical procedures, acute care, rehabilitation, post-traumatic complications, translational medicine, traffic medicine and other related areas. The journal especially emphasizes clinical application, technique, surgical video, guideline, recommendations for more effective surgical approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信