Literature DB >> 7965682

Comparison of three methods for obtaining plantar pressures in nonpathologic subjects.

B Meyers-Rice1, L Sugars, T McPoil, M W Cornwall.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine if pressure data, collected after taking one step or two steps, were similar to values obtained by using the traditional midgait method. Ten healthy subjects, with a mean age of 27 years, walked across a sensor platform sampling at 70 Hz. Each subject was randomly assigned to take one step, two steps, or multiple steps (midgait method) across the sensor platform. The results of the study indicate that the two-step method, in comparison with the one-step method, provides pressure data more representative of the midgait method, and different values for pressure and force will be obtained, depending on the method of pressure data collection selected by the clinician.

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 7965682     DOI: 10.7547/87507315-84-10-499

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Podiatr Med Assoc        ISSN: 1930-8264


  16 in total

1.  The modified oblique keller capsular interpositional arthroplasty for hallux rigidus.

Authors:  R Brian Mackey; A Brian Thomson; Ohyun Kwon; Michael J Mueller; Jeffrey E Johnson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2010-08-18       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Removable cast walker boots yield greater forefoot off-loading than total contact casts.

Authors:  David J Gutekunst; Mary K Hastings; Kathryn L Bohnert; Michael J Strube; David R Sinacore
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 2.063

3.  Bone mineral density of the tarsals and metatarsals with reloading.

Authors:  Mary Kent Hastings; Judy Gelber; Paul K Commean; Fred Prior; David R Sinacore
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2008-04-03

4.  Botulinum toxin effects on gasatrocnemius strength and plantar pressure in diabetics with peripheral neuropathy and forefoot ulceration.

Authors:  Mary K Hastings; Michael J Mueller; David R Sinacore; Michael J Strube; Beth E Crowner; Jeffrey E Johnson; Brad R Racette
Journal:  Foot Ankle Int       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.827

5.  Foot progression angle and medial loading in individuals with diabetes mellitus, peripheral neuropathy, and a foot ulcer.

Authors:  Mary K Hastings; Judy R Gelber; Elena J Isaac; Kathryn L Bohnert; Michael J Strube; David R Sinacore
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2010-05-31       Impact factor: 2.840

6.  Are Pressure Time Integral and Cumulative Plantar Stress Related to First Metatarsophalangeal Joint Pain? Results From a Community-Based Study.

Authors:  Smita Rao; K Douglas Gross; Jingbo Niu; Michael C Nevitt; Cora E Lewis; James C Torner; Jean Hietpas; David Felson; Howard J Hillstrom
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 4.794

7.  Pedal bone density, strength, orientation, and plantar loads preceding incipient metatarsal fracture after charcot neuroarthropathy: 2 case reports.

Authors:  David J Gutekunst; David R Sinacore
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2013-09-09       Impact factor: 4.751

8.  The effect of foot structure on 1st metatarsophalangeal joint flexibility and hallucal loading.

Authors:  Smita Rao; Jinsup Song; Andrew Kraszewski; Sherry Backus; Scott J Ellis; Jonathan T Deland; Howard J Hillstrom
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 2.840

9.  Mid foot kinetics characterize structural polymorphism in diabetic foot disease.

Authors:  David R Sinacore; Kathryn L Bohnert; Mary K Hastings; Jeffrey E Johnson
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2007-06-28       Impact factor: 2.063

10.  Classification of forefoot plantar pressure distribution in persons with diabetes: a novel perspective for the mechanical management of diabetic foot?

Authors:  Kevin Deschamps; Giovanni Arnoldo Matricali; Philip Roosen; Kaat Desloovere; Herman Bruyninckx; Pieter Spaepen; Frank Nobels; Jos Tits; Mieke Flour; Filip Staes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.