| Literature DB >> 26472543 |
Antonio Córdoba-Fernández1, Pedro Montaño-Jiménez2, Manuel Coheña-Jiménez3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Many risk factors have been identified to be associated with ingrown toenail. Internal pressure by the distal phalanx of the hallux and the second toe and external compression from the shoes has been proposed as a reason for the pathology. The main objective of the study was to analyze the existence of a correlation between the presence of pathological hallux interphalangeal angle (HIA) and risk of ingrown hallux nail.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26472543 PMCID: PMC4608311 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-015-0749-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
General Features of patients
| Control group | Study group | Total analysed | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Toes | 156 (50 %) | 156 (50 %) | 312 |
| Males | 37 | 26 | 63 |
| Females | 44 | 58 | 102 |
| Average age | 27.19 | 25.35 | 26.27 |
| Standard deviation | 9.48 | 9.04 | 9.26 |
| Median (range) | 23 (12–50) | 23 (10–50) | 23 (10–50) |
Fig. 1Obliquity angle: A tangent was drawn to the articular surface of the proximal phalangeal head (a, b). A perpendicular line (c, d) was then extended from the longitudinal bisection of the proximal phalanx. Obliquity is the angular relationship between this perpendicular line and the mentionated tangent
Fig. 2Assimmetry angle: A tangent was drawn to the articular surface of the distal phalangeal base (a, b). A perpendicular line (c, d) was then extended from the longitudinal bisection of the distal phalanx. Assymmetry is the angular relationship between this perpendicular line and the above mentionated tangent (ABC)
Fig. 3Joint deviation angle: Tangents were drawn to articular surfaces of the distal phalangeal base (a, b) and the proximal phalangeal head (c, b). Joint deviation is the angular relationship between these two tangents (ABC)
Comparison of the mean HIA between groups (N = 312 toes, 165 patients)
| Degrees | Control group | Onychocryptosis | P |
|---|---|---|---|
| Median (minimum, maximum) | (12.73, 14.20) | (16.44, 18.33) | |
| Mean ± SD | 13.47 ± 4.66 | 17.39 ± 6.00 | .036a |
| Typical mean error | .374 | .481 | |
| 95 % CI (lower limit, upper limit) | (12.73-14.20) | (16.44-18.33) |
aStudent t test; CI (95 %)
Distribution of the mean of HIA in the study group according to sex
| Mean ± SD | Typical mean error | Lower-upper limit | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Males (63 subjects) | 15.59 ± 6.31 | .42 | 14.49-16.16 |
| Female (102 subjects) | 15.33 ± 5.30 | .50 | 14.59-16.58 |
N 156 toes, 84 patients, P .280; CI (95 %)
Means distribution of HIA values for both groups included according to age group analysed
| Study group | Control group | |
|---|---|---|
| Age intervals | ||
| 10-20 years | 15.64 ± 4.57 | 13.95 ± 3.58 |
| 21-30 years | 18.67 ± 6.72 | 14.71 ± 5.19 |
| 31-40 years | 18.17 ± 4.21 | 10.92 ± 4.06 |
| 41-50 years | 14.69 ± 6.82 | 11.74 ± 4.16 |
Data are presented as mean ± SD (95 % confidence interval)
Comparisons of the mean HIA performed within the different age groups in the study group
| Variable | Mean of difference |
|
|---|---|---|
| Age group of 21-30 | ||
| VS 10-20 | 2.02 | .69 |
| VS 31-40 | 2.36 | .100 |
| VS 41-50 | 4.02 | .002 |
* Scheffe test of multiple comparisons; CI (95 %)
Contingency table between abnormal HIA and nail edge affected
| Lateral | Nail edge medial | Total | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HIA | <13.47º | Recount | 4 | 37 | 41 |
| Expected frequency | 2.6 | 38.4 | 41 | ||
| ≥13.47º | Recount | 6 | 109 | 115 | |
| Expected frequency | 7.4 | 107.6 | 115 | ||
| Total | Recount | 10 | 146 | 156 | |
| Expected frequency | 10 | 146 | 156 |
χ2-Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient: P = .517