Literature DB >> 18796860

Motion measured from forefoot and hindfoot landmarks during passive ankle dorsiflexion range of motion.

R W Bohannon, D Tiberio, G Waters.   

Abstract

This project was funded, in part, by the Research Foundation, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-2101. The purpose of this study was to document and compare, using surface landmarks, the magnitude of forefoot and hindfoot motion accompanying passive ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (ADROM). Twenty-two healthy subjects had their right ankle passively dorsiflexed two times from a resting position to a maximum dorsiflexion while they were supine and their subtalar joints were positioned in neutral. Initial resting position and maximum ADROM were measured from surface markings over the fibula, fifth metatarsal, and heel in pictures taken with a 35 mm camera. The difference between the maximum ADROM and the initial measurements obtained from the markings over the fifth metatarsal and heel were used to represent motion of the forefoot and hindfoot, respectively. The grand mean forefoot motion (39.8 degrees ) and hindfoot motion (37.1 degrees ) were significantly different (F = 13.62, p </= 0.001). The motions, however, were significantly correlated for the two trials (r = 0.905 and 0.704). The small magnitude of the difference (= 2.7 degrees ) in forefoot and hindfoot motion and significant correlations between the motions challenge the need for foot stabilization other than maintaining the subtalar joint in neutral. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1991;13(1):20-22.

Entities:  

Year:  1991        PMID: 18796860     DOI: 10.2519/jospt.1991.13.1.20

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther        ISSN: 0190-6011            Impact factor:   4.751


  6 in total

1.  Reliability of three measures of ankle dorsiflexion range of motion.

Authors:  Megan M Konor; Sam Morton; Joan M Eckerson; Terry L Grindstaff
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2012-06

2.  Diagnosis of Musculus Gastrocnemius Tightness - Key Factors for the Clinical Examination.

Authors:  Sebastian F Baumbach; Mareen Braunstein; Markus Regauer; Wolfgang Böcker; Hans Polzer
Journal:  J Vis Exp       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 1.355

3.  The validity and reliability of a new instrumented device for measuring ankle dorsiflexion range of motion.

Authors:  Joaquin Calatayud; Fernando Martin; Pedro Gargallo; Jessica García-Redondo; Juan Carlos Colado; Pedro J Marín
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2015-04

4.  Subtalar joint position during gastrocnemius stretching and ankle dorsiflexion range of motion.

Authors:  Marie Johanson; Jennifer Baer; Holley Hovermale; Phouvy Phouthavong
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2008 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 2.860

5.  The concurrent validity and reliability of the Leg Motion system for measuring ankle dorsiflexion range of motion in older adults.

Authors:  Carlos Romero Morales; César Calvo Lobo; David Rodríguez Sanz; Irene Sanz Corbalán; Beatriz Ruiz Ruiz; Daniel López López
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  The influence of knee position on ankle dorsiflexion - a biometric study.

Authors:  Sebastian F Baumbach; Mareen Brumann; Jakob Binder; Wolf Mutschler; Markus Regauer; Hans Polzer
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2014-07-23       Impact factor: 2.362

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.