| Literature DB >> 30719073 |
Ping Huang1, Minjun Liang2, Feng Ren1,2.
Abstract
This study was aimed to analyze the foot posture index and plantar pressure characteristics of fifteen badminton players and fifteen controls. The hypothesis was that people with the habit of playing badminton would be significantly different with nonplaying people in foot posture index, 3D foot surface data, and plantar pressure distribution. Nine regions of plantar pressure were measured by using the EMED force platform, and badminton players showed significantly higher peak pressure in the hallux (p = 0.003), medial heel (p = 0.016), and lateral heel (p = 0.021) and force-time integral in the hallux (p = 0.002), medial heel (p = 0.026), and lateral heel (p = 0.015). There is no asymmetrical plantar pressure distribution between the left foot and the right foot of players. The mean foot posture index values of male and female badminton players are 5.2 ± 1.95 and 5.7 ± 1.15, respectively, and comparatively, those values of male and female controls are 1.5 ± 1.73 and 1.7 ± 4.16, respectively. This study shows that significant differences in morphology between people with the habit of playing badminton and people without that habit could be taken as a factor for a future study in locomotion biomechanics characteristics and foot shape of badminton players and in a footwear design in order to reduce injury risks.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30719073 PMCID: PMC6334366 DOI: 10.1155/2019/8082967
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Bionics Biomech ISSN: 1176-2322 Impact factor: 1.781
The basic demographics of habitual badminton players and normal people.
| Badminton players | Normal players | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Male | Female | |
| Age (years) | 22 ± 2.8 | 21 ± 1.0 | 24 ± 1.2 | 23 ± 1.0 |
| Weight (kg) | 69.8 ± 6.5 | 51.7 ± 2.9 | 67 ± 6.1 | 61 ± 12.1 |
| Height (m) | 175 ± 4.5 | 162 ± 2.9 | 173 ± 4.1 | 163 ± 6.4 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 21.66 ± 1.38 | 19.75 ± 0.39 | 21.99 ± 1.46 | 20.58 ± 1.29 |
| Badminton experience (years) | 5.5 ± 2.8 | 6 ± 0 | 0 | 0 |
Note: mean ± standard deviation; BMI—body mass index.
Figure 1The foot segments (nine in total) used by the EMED pressure platform.
Figure 2The peak pressure in nine anatomical parts with an illustration of existing significance (∗ indicates p < 0.05).
G power for the foot pressure.
| Peak pressure | Contact area | Force-time integral | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Walk | Run | Walk | Run | Walk | Run | |||||||
| Effect size | Power | Effect size | Power | Effect size | Power | Effect size | Power | Effect size | Power | Effect size | Power | |
| H | 0.52 | 0.84 | 0.23 | 0.8 | 0.21 | 0.8 | 0.31 | 0.8 | 0.64 | 0.88 | 0.29 | 0.81 |
| OT | 0.4 | 0.82 | 0.42 | 0.81 | 0.19 | 0.8 | 0.28 | 0.81 | 0.28 | 0.8 | 0.61 | 0.85 |
| M1 | 0.37 | 0.82 | 0.31 | 0.81 | 0.18 | 0.8 | 0.83 | 0.93 | 0.31 | 0.81 | 0.37 | 0.82 |
| M24 | 0.18 | 0.8 | 0.07 | 0.8 | 0.01 | 0.8 | 0.08 | 0.8 | 0.21 | 0.8 | 0.07 | 0.8 |
| M5 | 0.22 | 0.81 | 0.3 | 0.81 | 0.32 | 0.81 | 0.28 | 0.8 | 0.6 | 0.83 | 0.26 | 0.81 |
| MM | 0.12 | 0.8 | 0.02 | 0.8 | 0.2 | 0.8 | 0.08 | 0.8 | 0.07 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 0.8 |
| LM | 0.09 | 0.8 | 0.48 | 0.83 | 0.06 | 0.8 | 0.16 | 0.8 | 0.09 | 0.8 | 0.03 | 0.8 |
| MH | 0.44 | 0.81 | 0.53 | 0.8 | 0.26 | 0.8 | 0.13 | 0.8 | 0.42 | 0.82 | 0.34 | 0.8 |
| LH | 0.44 | 0.81 | 0.29 | 0.8 | 0.24 | 0.8 | 0.18 | 0.8 | 0.41 | 0.81 | 0.16 | 0.8 |
Figure 3The contact area in nine anatomical parts with an illustration of significance (∗ indicates p < 0.05).
Figure 4The force-time integral in nine anatomical parts with an illustration of significance (∗ indicates p < 0.05).
Mean values for the foot posture index.
| Habitual players | Normal players | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Male | Female | |
| FPI | 5.2 ± 1.95 | 5.7 ± 1.15 | 1.5 ± 1.73 | 1.7 ± 4.16 |
| L/W ratio | 2.3 ± 0.26 | 2.2 ± 0.22 | 2.2 ± 0.32 | 2.1 ± 0.10 |
| B/W G ratio | 1.0 ± 0.09 | 1.0 ± 0.02 | 1.0 ± 0.02 | 1.0 ± 0.01 |
| S H/L ratio | 1.3 ± 0.04 | 1.3 ± 0.06 | 1.3 ± 0.04 | 1.3 ± 0.04 |
| S H/W ratio | 2.9 ± 0.30 | 2.8 ± 0.26 | 2.7 ± 0.37 | 2.6 ± 0.13 |
Note: values are presented as the mean ± standard deviation. L/W ratio, length/width; B/W G ratio, ball/waist girth; S H/L ratio, short hell/length; S H/W ratio, short hell/width.