The arch myth: investigating the impact of flat foot on vertical jump height: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
Haibin Yu, Wenjian Wu, Weihsun Tai, Jing Li, Rui Zhang
{"title":"The arch myth: investigating the impact of flat foot on vertical jump height: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Haibin Yu, Wenjian Wu, Weihsun Tai, Jing Li, Rui Zhang","doi":"10.1186/s13102-024-01018-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The necessity to exclude flat foot when selecting athletes is a controversial issue. This study aimed to investigate whether flat foot affects vertical jump.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The quality of the literature was assessed using the observational study quality assessment tool provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care in Australia. Meta-analysis, heterogeneity testing, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and forest plot were conducted using Review Manager 5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the end, 9 articles met the meta-analysis criteria. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, only vertical jump height was used as an indicator for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis results showed low heterogeneity among studies (I<sup>2</sup> = 6%, P = 0.39), and the combined effect size showed no significant difference in jumping height between flat foot and normal foot (P = 0.73, ES = 0.13, 95%CI [-0.58, 0.83]). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in jump heights between flat and normal foot in either the adolescent subgroup (ES = 0.07, 95% CI [-1.04, 1.18]) or the adult subgroup (ES = 0.16, 95% CI [-0.76, 1.08]). Subgroups were divided according to training background, and jump height was unaffected by flat foot in both athletes (ES = -0.08, 95%CI [-1.07, 0.90]) and amateur (ES = 0.34, 95%CI [-0.67, 1.35]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, flat foot do not affect vertical jump height, although flat foot have different vertical jump biomechanics. This study breaks the bias that flat foot have poorer athletic performance. The meta-analysis has been registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42023481326.</p>","PeriodicalId":48585,"journal":{"name":"BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":"16 1","pages":"236"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603910/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-024-01018-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The necessity to exclude flat foot when selecting athletes is a controversial issue. This study aimed to investigate whether flat foot affects vertical jump.

Methods: The quality of the literature was assessed using the observational study quality assessment tool provided by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Centre for Evidence-Based Health Care in Australia. Meta-analysis, heterogeneity testing, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and forest plot were conducted using Review Manager 5.4.

Results: In the end, 9 articles met the meta-analysis criteria. Due to the heterogeneity of the studies, only vertical jump height was used as an indicator for meta-analysis. Meta-analysis results showed low heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 6%, P = 0.39), and the combined effect size showed no significant difference in jumping height between flat foot and normal foot (P = 0.73, ES = 0.13, 95%CI [-0.58, 0.83]). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences in jump heights between flat and normal foot in either the adolescent subgroup (ES = 0.07, 95% CI [-1.04, 1.18]) or the adult subgroup (ES = 0.16, 95% CI [-0.76, 1.08]). Subgroups were divided according to training background, and jump height was unaffected by flat foot in both athletes (ES = -0.08, 95%CI [-1.07, 0.90]) and amateur (ES = 0.34, 95%CI [-0.67, 1.35]).

Conclusion: Overall, flat foot do not affect vertical jump height, although flat foot have different vertical jump biomechanics. This study breaks the bias that flat foot have poorer athletic performance. The meta-analysis has been registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42023481326.

足弓神话:调查平足对垂直跳跃高度的影响:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:在选拔运动员时排除扁平足的必要性是一个有争议的问题。本研究旨在探讨平足是否影响垂直跳跃。方法:采用澳大利亚乔安娜布里格斯研究所(JBI)循证卫生保健中心提供的观察性研究质量评估工具对文献质量进行评估。采用Review Manager 5.4进行meta分析、异质性检验、敏感性分析、亚组分析和森林样地分析。结果:最终有9篇文章符合meta分析标准。由于研究的异质性,仅使用垂直跳跃高度作为meta分析的指标。meta分析结果显示各研究间异质性较低(I2 = 6%, P = 0.39),综合效应量显示平足与正常足在跳跃高度上无显著差异(P = 0.73, ES = 0.13, 95%CI[-0.58, 0.83])。亚组分析显示,在青少年亚组(ES = 0.07, 95% CI[-1.04, 1.18])和成人亚组(ES = 0.16, 95% CI[-0.76, 1.08])中,平足和正常足的跳跃高度没有显著差异。根据训练背景划分亚组,运动员(ES = -0.08, 95%CI[-1.07, 0.90])和业余运动员(ES = 0.34, 95%CI[-0.67, 1.35])的跳跃高度不受平足的影响。结论:总体而言,平足不影响垂直起跳高度,尽管平足具有不同的垂直起跳生物力学。这项研究打破了平足运动表现较差的偏见。该meta分析已在PROSPERO注册,注册号为CRD42023481326。
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
BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation
BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
196
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation is an open access, peer reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of sports medicine and the exercise sciences, including rehabilitation, traumatology, cardiology, physiology, and nutrition.
×
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