Literature DB >> 8696496

Reliability of an in-shoe pressure measurement system during treadmill walking.

T W Kernozek1, E E LaMott, M J Dancisak.   

Abstract

We examined the reliability of in-shoe foot pressure measurement using the Pedar in-shoe pressure measurement system for 25 participants walking at treadmill speeds of 0.89, 1.12, and 1.34 meters/sec. The measurement system uses EMED insoles, which consist of 99 capacitive sensors, sampled at 50 Hz. Data were collected for 20 seconds at two separate times while participants walked at each gait speed. Differences in some of the loading variables across speed relative to the total foot and across the different anatomical regions were detected. Different anatomical regions of the foot were loaded differently with variations in walking speed. The results indicated the need to control speed when evaluating loading parameters using in-shoe pressure measurement techniques. Coefficients of reliability were calculated. Variables such as peak force for the total foot required two steps to achieve a coefficient of reliability of 0.98. To achieve excellent reliability (> 0.90) in the peak force, force time integral, peak pressure, and pressure time integral across the total foot and the seven regions, a maximum of eight steps was needed. In general, timing variables, such as the instant of peak force and the instant of peak pressure, tended to be the least reliable measures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8696496     DOI: 10.1177/107110079601700404

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Foot Ankle Int        ISSN: 1071-1007            Impact factor:   2.827


  16 in total

1.  Surface electromyography and plantar pressure during walking in young adults with chronic ankle instability.

Authors:  Rachel M Koldenhoven; Mark A Feger; John J Fraser; Susan Saliba; Jay Hertel
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2016-02-08       Impact factor: 4.342

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.  The accuracy of an automasking algorithm in plantar pressure measurements.

Authors:  Scott J Ellis; Hill Stoecklein; Joseph C Yu; Grisha Syrkin; Howard Hillstrom; Jonathan T Deland
Journal:  HSS J       Date:  2010-11-30

4.  CAN RUNNERS PERCEIVE CHANGES IN HEEL CUSHIONING AS THE SHOE AGES WITH INCREASED MILEAGE?

Authors:  Mark W Cornwall; Thomas G McPoil
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2017-08

5.  Slip-Related Changes in Plantar Pressure Distribution, and Parameters for Early Detection of Slip Events.

Authors:  Seungyoung Choi; Hyungpil Cho; Boram Kang; Dong Hun Lee; Mi Jung Kim; Seong Ho Jang
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2015-12-29

Review 6.  Pedobarography in Physiotherapy: A Narrative Review on Current Knowledge.

Authors:  Jacek Lorkowski; Karolina Gawronska
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2022       Impact factor: 2.622

7.  Comparison of foot orthoses made by podiatrists, pedorthists and orthotists regarding plantar pressure reduction in The Netherlands.

Authors:  Nick A Guldemond; Pieter Leffers; Nicolaas C Schaper; Antal P Sanders; Fred H M Nieman; Geert H I M Walenkamp
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2005-12-20       Impact factor: 2.362

8.  Contoured, prefabricated foot orthoses demonstrate comparable mechanical properties to contoured, customised foot orthoses: a plantar pressure study.

Authors:  Anthony C Redmond; Karl B Landorf; Anne-Maree Keenan
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2009-06-16       Impact factor: 2.303

9.  Accuracy and repeatability of the gait analysis by the WalkinSense system.

Authors:  Marcelo P de Castro; Marco Meucci; Denise P Soares; Pedro Fonseca; Márcio Borgonovo-Santos; Filipa Sousa; Leandro Machado; João Paulo Vilas-Boas
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 3.411

10.  Intra-subject sample size effects in plantar pressure analyses.

Authors:  Juliet McClymont; Russell Savage; Todd C Pataky; Robin Crompton; James Charles; Karl T Bates
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.