Search

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research / Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu is the property of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective：To explore the characteristics of arch function in patients with flexible flat foot by comparing the differences of static and dynamic arch function between normal and flexible flat foot patients, provide theoretical reference for the functional distinction of different types of foot arch. Method：Thirty adult male subjects were recruited. Normal and flat feet were distinguished by foot printing method, and flexible flat feet were screened by heel raising test and passive toe raising test. Sixteen normal feet and fourteen patients with flexible flat feet were screened. Static arch stiffness was calculated by the difference of arch height between natural standing and sitting at different loading positions, and the relative arch height at the beginning of the middle support period, change value of relative arch height, change rate of relative arch height and proportion of middle foot impulse during walking were evaluated by 3D motion capture and plantar pressure. The correlation between static arch stiffness and dynamic arch function was analyzed by partial correlation(controlling step speed). Result：The static arch stiffness of flexible flat feet was lower than that of normal feet (P<0.05). The results of dynamic arch function test showed that the relative height and change rate of arch height in the middle of walking support decreased gradually in both normal and flexible flat feet, the change value and change rate of arch height in flexible flat feet at the beginning of the middle of walking support period were lower than those in normal feet (P<0.05). The proportion of impulse of flexible flat feet in walking support was higher than that of normal feet (P<0.05). Partial correlation analysis showed that the relative height, relative height change value and relative height change rate at the beginning of middle support were positively correlated with static arch stiffness (r=0.580—0.679, P<0.05), the proportion of middle foot impulse was negatively correlated with static arch stiffness(r=﹣0.478, P<0.05). Conclusion：During walking, the arch of the foot continued to decline in the middle of support, and the rate of decline gradually decreased. The adaptability of static and dynamic arches to loading in patients with flexible flat feet was lower than that of normal feet. It is the key of ankle rehabilitation to improve the weight bearing adaptability of arch in patients with flexible flat foot. Arch stiffness is correlated with dynamic arch function, which is an important reference value for the functional division of different types of foot arch. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research / Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu is the property of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research / Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu is the property of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research / Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu is the property of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research / Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu is the property of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

BACKGROUND: The abnormal foot structure affects the cushioning, power and energy storage of the foot. Studies have shown that the biomechanical evaluation methods of foot structure and foot function have certain reference value for distinguishing asymptomatic abnormal foot types. OBJECTIVE: To explore the biomechanical indexes of the foot structure and function and to classify them. METHODS: A search of CNKI, Baidu Scholar, Baichain Scholar, PudMed, SpringeLink, and Nature was performed using the search terms of “foot structure, foot function,” “plantar pressure, pressure center trajectory,” “foot arch, transverse arch,” “gait,” in Chinese as well as “foot function,” “center of pressure,” “flatfoot,” “arch index” in English for relevant documents published from January 1993 to May 2020. We explored the testing methods for foot structure and the biomechanical evaluation methods for foot function from static and dynamic aspects in combination with the mechanical characteristics of the foot. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: For the static evaluation of foot function, the turnover index and stiffness of the ankle joint are used to evaluate the structure and function of the ankle joint; the angle between the heelpiece and the crus and the medial longitudinal arch angle are used to evaluate the heel structure and function; the arch height index and arch height adaptability are used to evaluate the function of the foot arch; toe adaptability is used to evaluate the function of the thumb under external torque; the static function of the foot is systematically evaluated in combination with the scoring system of the foot posture index. In terms of dynamic kinematics, the dynamic foot function is evaluated based on arch index, pressure center trajectory and foot turnover index. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research / Zhongguo Zuzhi Gongcheng Yanjiu is the property of Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

BACKGROUND: Changes in the center of body weight during standing reflects the structure, function and muscles of the lower limbs and even the whole body. The relationship between standing posture control and foot type, balance ability, and muscle activation is rarely reported. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of natural, lean forward and lean backward standing on foot arch, body balance and muscle activation. METHODS: Fifteen subjects without foot lesions and diseases related to foot function were selected. Three-dimensional foot scanner was used to test and analyze the foot arch in three standing postures. BTS FREEMG 300 surface electromyography tester and balance tester were used to test and analyze the maximum root mean square of muscle and two balance ability indexes (envelope area and average velocity of center of gravity) in three standing postures. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) For height index of foot arch: there was significant difference between natural standing and forward standing (P < 0.05). There was significant difference between natural standing and backward standing (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between forward standing and backward standing (P > 0.05). (2) The degree of muscle activation was as follows: when standing naturally, the medial peroneal muscles > erector muscles > rectus abdominis > gluteus medius > biceps femoris > external oblique femoris > anterior tibial muscle > rectus femoris muscle > gluteus maximus muscle. During forward standing: the medial of the peroneal muscle > medius gluteus > vertical ridge > long head of biceps femoris > anterior tibial muscle > rectus abdominis muscle > gluteus maximus. During backward standing: the obliquus externus femur > rectus femoris > long head of biceps femoris > erector spinae > musculus rectus abdominis > the medial of the peroneal muscle > gluteus medius > gluteus maximus. (3) Balance: there was no significant difference between natural standing and forward standing (P > 0.05); there was significant difference between natural standing and backward standing (P < 0.05), but there was no significant difference between forward standing and backward standing (P > 0.05). (4) In summary, it is easy to maintain body stability at low muscle activation intensity when the human body is standing naturally. During the body backward standing, the muscle activation intensity is highest due to instability. When the center of gravity moves forward and backward, the contralateral muscle is mainly activated. The arch of the foot rises when it leans forward and backward. The slight anterior and posterior movements of the center of gravity in the standing posture can lead to changes in muscle activation degree and balance control. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Walking and running are essential exercises in daily life. Foot joints are flexible and most likely to damage. Displacement of the pressure center can reflect the inner-lateral and anteroposterior movement of the foot, which is an index for evaluating the function of the foot, and is used to describe the complex dynamic function of the foot and sole interface in the gait process. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the characteristics and regularity of plantar pressure center in different movement modes by studying the locus of plantar pressure center in the course of walking and running in young males. METHODS: The walking and running patterns of 45 healthy young men were tested with Footscan force measuring plate, and gait test and analysis were carried out. The foot pressure trajectory and foot progression angle were observed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) The percentage of the pressure center locus in the left foot walking and running was significantly different in the initial contact phase, the forefoot contact phase and the foot flat phase (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference at the forefoot push off phase (P > 0.05). There were significant differences in all stages of the right foot (P < 0.05). (2) There was no significant difference in the percentage of center of pressure locus between left and right feet in the walking mode (P > 0.05). The results of left and right feet in running mode were similar to those of walking. (3) There were significant differences in foot progression angle between walking and running mode in initial contact phase, forefoot contact phase, foot flat phase, and forefoot push off phase (P < 0.05). (4) In summary, there are differences in each stage of running support period. The time of foot following the running period becomes short and the heel relative load decreases with the increase of speed. The center of pressure trajectory of the left and right feet of the same motion pattern is not very different, and the center of pressure trajectory can be used to distinguish different motion patterns, and more centers of pressure tracks are offset in the running mode. The foot progression angle in walking and running is largest in the stage of leaving the ground in the front palm, smallest in the contact stage of the whole foot, and the rotation outside the foot in the first two stages, and in the latter two stages. In the initial contact phase and the forefoot push off phase, the foot progression angle is smaller than the walk, while in the other two stages, the foot progression angle is greater than the walk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]