These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: Cranio-caudal and medio-lateral navicular translation are representative surrogate measures of foot function in asymptomatic adults during walking. Author: Eichelberger P, Pohl J, Jaspers T, Ferraro M, Krause F, Baur H. Journal: PLoS One; 2018; 13(12):e0208175. PubMed ID: 30517158. Abstract: INTRODUCTION: The translation of the navicular bone is thought to be a representative surrogate measure to assess foot pronation and hence foot function; however, it is not known how it is related to multi-segment foot kinematics. METHODS: Cranio-caudal (NCC) and medio-lateral (NML) navicular translation and multi-segment foot kinematics from the Oxford Foot Model (OFM) were simultaneously assessed during the stance phase of walking in 20 healthy adults. Relationships to forefoot to hindfoot (FFtoHF), hindfoot to tibia (HFtoTBA) and global hindfoot (HFL) motion were explored by cross-correlations at zero phase shift. RESULTS: FFtoHF sagittal, transversal and frontal plane angles showed median cross correlations of -0.95, 0.82 and 0.53 with NCC and of 0.78, -0.81 and -0.90 with NML. HFtoTBA transversal and frontal plane angles had correlations of 0.15 and 0.74 with NCC and of -0.38 and -0.83 with NML. The HFL frontal plane angle showed correlations of 0.41 and -0.44 with NCC and NML, respectively. DISCUSSION: The strongest relationships were found between FFtoHF sagittal plane angles and NCC and between FFtoHF frontal plane angles and NML. However, cranio-caudal and medio-lateral navicular translation seem to be reasonable surrogates for the triplanar motion between the fore- and hindfoot. The medial longitudinal arch dropped and bulged medially, while the forefoot dorsiflexed, abducted and everted with respect to the hindfoot and vice-versa. The lower cross-correlation coefficients between the rear foot parameters and NCC/NML indicated no distinct relationships between rearfoot frontal plane and midfoot kinematics. The validity of rearfoot parameters, like Achilles tendon or Calcaneal angle, to assess midfoot function must be therefore questioned. The study could also not confirm a systematic relationship between midfoot kinematics and the internal/external rotation between the hindfoot and the tibia. The measurement of navicular translation is suggested as an alternative to more complex multi-segment foot models to assess foot function.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]