Repeatability of the Oxford Foot Model for Kinematic Gait Analysis of the Foot and Ankle

2015 ◽  
Vol 03 (02) ◽  
Author(s):  
van Hoeve S de Vos J ◽  
Weijers PHE Verbruggen JPAM
Keyword(s):  
Gait Analysis ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Foot Model ◽  
Oxford Foot Model ◽  
Kinematic Gait Analysis

BAREFOOT AND SHOD CONDITIONS: HOW TO RECONCILE THEM FOR PLANTAR PRESSURE ANALYSIS IN THE OXFORD FOOT MODEL

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (02) ◽  
pp. 1540003
Author(s):  
A. D. JAITMAN ◽  
N. D. EVANS ◽  
M. J. CHAPPELL
Keyword(s):  
Gait Analysis ◽  
Human Body ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Plantar Pressure ◽  
The Other ◽  
Pressure Measurements ◽  
Foot Model ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Oxford Foot Model ◽  
Pressure Analysis

The foot plays an important role as it is the only connection that the human body has with the floor when walking, running, etc. The two main techniques commonly used to study the lower limb in biomechanics are gait analysis and plantar pressure measurements. However, they require different settings: One requires barefoot experimentation and the other requires the subject to be shod. The method proposed in this paper attempts to solve this problem by designing shoes that can mimic both conditions. This allows the analysis of both approaches simultaneously and therefore provides valuable inputs for the development of a well validated model of the foot.

Results of Gait Analysis Including the Oxford Foot Model in Children with Clubfoot Treated with the Ponseti Method

2014 ◽  
Vol 96 (19) ◽  
pp. 1593-1599 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel T. Mindler ◽  
Andreas Kranzl ◽  
Charlotte A.M. Lipkowski ◽  
Rudolf Ganger ◽  
Christof Radler
Keyword(s):  
Gait Analysis ◽  
Ponseti Method ◽  
Foot Model ◽  
Oxford Foot Model

Foot Segment Kinematics During Normal Walking Using a Multisegment Model of the Foot and Ankle Complex

2009 ◽  
Vol 131 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Jenkyn ◽  
Kiersten Anas ◽  
Alexander Nichol
Keyword(s):  
Gait Analysis ◽  
Kinematic Model ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Optical Tracking ◽  
Medial Longitudinal Arch ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Rehabilitative Treatment ◽  
Longitudinal Arch ◽  
Foot Model ◽  
Asymptomatic Subjects

Gait analysis using optical tracking equipment has been demonstrated to be a clinically useful tool for measuring three-dimensional kinematics and kinetics of the human body. However, in current practice, the foot is treated as a single rigid segment that articulates with the lower leg, meaning the motions of the joints of the foot cannot be measured. A multisegment kinematic model of the foot was developed for use in a gait analysis laboratory. The foot was divided into hindfoot, talus, midfoot, and medial and lateral forefoot segments. Six functional joints were defined: Ankle and subtalar joints, frontal and transverse plane motions of the hindfoot relative to midfoot, supination-pronation twist of the forefoot relative to midfoot, and medial longitudinal arch height-to-length ratio. Twelve asymptomatic subjects were tested during barefoot walking with a six-camera optical stereometric system and passive markers organized in triads. Repeatability of reported motions was tested using coefficients of multiple correlation. Ankle and subtalar joint motions and twisting of the forefoot were most repeatable. Hindfoot motions were least repeatable both within subjects and between subjects. Hindfoot and forefoot pronations in the frontal place were found to coincide with dropping of the medial longitudinal arch between early to midstance, followed by supination and rising of the arch in late stance and swing phase. This multisegment foot model overcomes a major shortcoming in current gait analysis practice—the inability to measure motion within the foot. Such measurements are crucial if gait analysis is to remain relevant in orthopaedic and rehabilitative treatment of the foot and ankle.

scholarly journals Gait analysis using the Oxford Foot Model for ankle arthrodesis compared with normal control

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 2473011418S0037
Author(s):  
Yuki Ota ◽  
Tomoyuki Nakasa ◽  
Mikiya Sawa ◽  
Masahiro Yoshikawa ◽  
Yusuke Tsuyuguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gait Analysis ◽  
Gait Cycle ◽  
Ankle Arthrodesis ◽  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Healthy Group ◽  
Heel Contact ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Foot Model ◽  
Hind Foot ◽  
Oxford Foot Model

Category: Ankle Arthritis Introduction/Purpose: Ankle arthrodesis is still the primary treatment for end-stage arthritis of the ankle that does not respond to conservative treatment. However, comparative studies demonstrated that the patients’ functional outcomes remain significantly lower than normal, progression of subtalar and midfoot arthritis and there could be measurable abnormalities in their gait parameters. Previous studies demonstrated gait analysis after ankle arthrodesis using 3D motion capture system. These studies used a single segment foot model, which had the limitation of detailed motion analysis. 3D multi-segmental foot model enables to perform detailed analysis segmentally such as fore foot and hind foot. The purpose of this study was to examine foot kinematics during walking after ankle arthrodesis using 3D multi-segment foot model as compared with a healthy control group. Methods: Between 2014 and 2016, nine patients who underwent an isolated ankle arthrodesis were followed for a mean 2 years after surgery, and five control subjects were included for comparison. Physical examination, radiographic examination and gait examination were performed. For gait analysis Vicon Nexus system with 16 MX-Cameras was used to capture foot kinematics during barefoot walking at self-selected speed along a 10 m walkway. Markers were placed according to the Oxford Foot Model (OFM). Patients completed preoperative and annual postoperative functional outcome scores including the Japanese Society for Surgery of the Foot (JSSF) scale. Results: JSSF scale was significantly improved from pre-operation to post-operation (50 points versus 85 points; p<0.05). The range of sagittal motion in hind foot during one gait cycle was significantly smaller in the arthrodesis group than in the healthy group (4.6 degrees versus 20 degrees; p<0.05). The range of coronal motion in hind foot was also significantly smaller in the arthrodesis group than that in the healthy group (3.7 degrees versus 15.1 degrees; p<0.05). There was no significant difference in the range of sagittal motion in forefoot between arthrodesis group and healthy group (20.2 degrees versus 16.6 degrees). However, there were significant differences at heel contact. Forefoot in arthrodesis group was significantly toward plantarflexion (6.1 degrees versus -2.0 degrees; p<0.05). Conclusion: In this study, detailed motion of foot after ankle arthrodesis could be analyzed by using OFM. Range of sagittal motion in hind foot in arthrodesis group during one gait cycle was significantly smaller than that in healthy group. However, no significant difference was observed in the forefoot. The same result was also obtained on the frontal plane. In arthrodesis group, forefoot tended to be more plantarflexion than healthy group in gait, especially there was significant difference at heel contact. These findings suggested to cause lower functional outcomes and the progression of subtalar and midfoot arthritis after ankle arthrodesis.

scholarly journals Analysis of foot kinematics wearing high heels using the Oxford foot model

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 815-823 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meizi Wang ◽  
Yaodong Gu ◽  
Julien Steven Baker
Keyword(s):  
Foot Kinematics ◽  
Foot Model ◽  
High Heels ◽  
Oxford Foot Model

Sagittal Plane Kinematics of Passive Dorsiflexion of the Foot in Adolescent Athletes

2013 ◽  
Vol 103 (5) ◽  
pp. 394-399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfred Gatt ◽  
Nachiappan Chockalingam ◽  
Owen Falzon
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Sagittal Plane ◽  
Random Order ◽  
Adolescent Athletes ◽  
Range Of Movement ◽  
Kinematic Data ◽  
Repeated Measures Analysis ◽  
Foot Posture ◽  
Foot Model ◽  
Oxford Foot Model

Background: Although assessment of passive maximum foot dorsiflexion angle is performed routinely, there is a paucity of information regarding adolescents’ foot and foot segment motion during this procedure. There are currently no trials investigating the kinematics of the adolescent foot during passive foot dorsiflexion. Methods: A six-camera optoelectronic motion capture system was used to collect kinematic data using the Oxford Foot Model. Eight female amateur gymnasts 11 to 16 years old (mean age, 13.2 years; mean height, 1.5 m) participated in the study. A dorsiflexing force was applied to the forefoot until reaching maximum resistance with the foot placed in the neutral, pronated, and supinated positions in random order. The maximum foot dorsiflexion angle and the range of movement of the forefoot to hindfoot, tibia to forefoot, and tibia to hindfoot angles were computed. Results: Mean ± SD maximum foot dorsiflexion angles were 36.3° ± 7.2° for pronated, 36.9° ± 4.0° for neutral, and 33.0° ± 4.9° for supinated postures. One-way repeated-measures analysis of variance results were nonsignificant among the 3 groups (P = .70), as were the forefoot to tibia angle and hindfoot to tibia angle variations (P = .091 and P = .188, respectively). Forefoot to hindfoot angle increased with the application of force, indicating that in adolescents, the forefoot does not lock at any particular posture as portrayed by the traditional Rootian paradigm. Conclusions: Participants had very flexible foot dorsiflexion, unlike those in another study assessing adolescent athletes. This finding, together with nonsignificant statistical results, implies that foot dorsiflexion measurement may be performed at any foot posture without notably affecting results. (J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 103(5): 394–399, 2013)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document