↓ Skip to main content

The reproducibility of acquiring three dimensional gait and plantar pressure data using established protocols in participants with and without type 2 diabetes and foot ulcers

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
125 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The reproducibility of acquiring three dimensional gait and plantar pressure data using established protocols in participants with and without type 2 diabetes and foot ulcers
Published in
Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13047-016-0135-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Malindu Fernando, Robert G Crowther, Margaret Cunningham, Peter A Lazzarini, Kunwarjit S Sangla, Petra Buttner, Jonathan Golledge

Abstract

Several prospective studies have suggested that gait and plantar pressure abnormalities secondary to diabetic peripheral neuropathy contributes to foot ulceration. There are many different methods by which gait and plantar pressures are assessed and currently there is no agreed standardised approach. This study aimed to describe the methods and reproducibility of three-dimensional gait and plantar pressure assessments in a small subset of participants using pre-existing protocols. Fourteen participants were conveniently sampled prior to a planned longitudinal study; four patients with diabetes and plantar foot ulcers, five patients with diabetes but no foot ulcers and five healthy controls. The repeatability of measuring key biomechanical data was assessed including the identification of 16 key anatomical landmarks, the measurement of seven leg dimensions, the processing of 22 three-dimensional gait parameters and the analysis of four different plantar pressures measures at 20 foot regions. The mean inter-observer differences were within the pre-defined acceptable level (<7 mm) for 100 % (16 of 16) of key anatomical landmarks measured for gait analysis. The intra-observer assessment concordance correlation coefficients were > 0.9 for 100 % (7 of 7) of leg dimensions. The coefficients of variations (CVs) were within the pre-defined acceptable level (<10 %) for 100 % (22 of 22) of gait parameters. The CVs were within the pre-defined acceptable level (<30 %) for 95 % (19 of 20) of the contact area measures, 85 % (17 of 20) of mean plantar pressures, 70 % (14 of 20) of pressure time integrals and 55 % (11 of 20) of maximum sensor plantar pressure measures. Overall, the findings of this study suggest that important gait and plantar pressure measurements can be reliably acquired. Nearly all measures contributing to three-dimensional gait parameter assessments were within predefined acceptable limits. Most plantar pressure measurements were also within predefined acceptable limits; however, reproducibility was not as good for assessment of the maximum sensor pressure. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the reproducibility of several biomechanical methods in a heterogeneous cohort.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 124 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 14%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 8%
Other 7 6%
Other 36 29%
Unknown 26 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 32 26%
Medicine and Dentistry 25 20%
Engineering 14 11%
Sports and Recreations 5 4%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 12 10%
Unknown 33 26%