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.

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