A method to investigate the effect of shoe-hole size on surface marker movement when describing in-shoe joint kinematics using a multi-segment foot model

doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.09.002

Gait & Posture

Volume 41, Issue 1, January 2015, Pages 295-299

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.09.002 Get rights and content

Highlights

•
This study used a novel method to assess the effect of shoe holes on marker motion during walking.
•
Researchers must consider the effect of shoe hole size on both individual marker and cluster motion.
•
Smaller hole sizes can impede free motion of the marker wand attached to the skin during walking.

Abstract

To investigate in-shoe foot kinematics, holes are often cut in the shoe upper to allow markers to be placed on the skin surface. However, there is currently a lack of understanding as to what is an appropriate size. This study aimed to demonstrate a method to assess whether different diameter holes were large enough to allow free motion of marker wands mounted on the skin surface during walking using a multi-segment foot model. Eighteen participants underwent an analysis of foot kinematics whilst walking barefoot and wearing shoes with different size holes (15 mm, 20 mm and 25 mm). The analysis was conducted in two parts; firstly the trajectory of the individual skin-mounted markers were analysed in a 2D ellipse to investigate total displacement of each marker during stance. Secondly, a geometrical analysis was conducted to assess cluster deformation of the hindfoot and midfoot–forefoot segments. Where movement of the markers in the 15 and 20 mm conditions were restricted, the marker movement in the 25 mm condition did not exceed the radius at any anatomical location. Despite significant differences in the isotropy index of the medial and lateral calcaneus markers between the 25 mm and barefoot conditions, the differences were due to the effect of footwear on the foot and not a result of the marker wands hitting the shoe upper. In conclusion, the method proposed and results can be used to increase confidence in the representativeness of joint kinematics with respect to in-shoe multi-segment foot motion during walking.

Introduction

The measurement of foot kinematics inside footwear typically relies on holes cut in the shoe upper to allow placement of markers directly on the foot [1], [2], [3]. Although surface-mounted marker techniques are susceptible to soft tissue artefacts (STA), they remain the most commonly used technique, and most practical based on current methods, to quantify foot and ankle motion [4], [5], [6]. Based on the preliminary work of Stacoff et al. [7], one critical consideration in describing in-shoe foot movement is the diameter of holes cut in the upper. Although an oval-hole shape of up to 2.7 cm × 2.3 cm has been said to not affect a shoe's structural integrity [8], the effect of hole size on individual marker movement has not been fully investigated. Therefore, the aim of this study was to expand on this preliminary work and demonstrate a method to investigate the effect of shoe-hole size on individual marker movement and segment motion during walking in a systematic manner.

Section snippets

Participants

Eighteen adults participated in this study (10F:8M, mean age 22.7 ± 3.7 years, height 1.74 m ± 0.08 m, mass 71.2 ± 8.5 kg, median Euro shoe size 42 [range = 37.5–46]). Exclusion criteria were any medical history that could adversely affect gait. Institutional ethics approval was granted for this study.

Data collection

All participants underwent three-dimensional (3D) gait analysis walking barefoot and wearing three pairs of single-density shoes (Gel Pulse 3, ASICS, Japan). Shoes were fitted by a podiatrist with 10 years’

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in walking speed between footwear conditions (15 mm = 1.52 ± 0.09 ms⁻¹, 20 mm = 1.53 ± 0.09 ms⁻¹, 25 mm = 1.54 ± 0.07 ms⁻¹, p > 0.05). In the 15 mm condition, the marker trajectory exceeded the radius at all anatomical locations at least once. In the 20 mm condition, the marker trajectory exceeded the radius at all sites except the navicular tuberosity. No marker exceeded the radius at any location in the 25 mm condition (Fig. 2). The 25 mm condition resulted in

Discussion

Where previous studies have either considered the effects of shoe-hole size on joint angles [7] or shoe structural integrity [8], this study considered both individual marker trajectories and segment rotations. Holes with a diameter of 25 mm were sufficiently large to prevent perturbed motion of surface-mounted markers. Although this finding is consistent with previous research [7], [8], we suggest the use of marker-wands (which have a 4 mm diameter compared to standard 9 mm markers) increases the

Funding

ASICS Oceania provided the footwear used in this study.

Acknowledgment

ASICS Oceania provided the footwear used in this study.
Conflict of interest statement

Nil.

References (12)

S. Wolf et al.
Foot motion in children shoes – a comparison of barefoot walking with shod walking in conventional and flexible shoes
Gait Posture
(2008)
A. Peters et al.
Quantification of soft tissue artifact in lower limb human motion analysis: a systematic review
Gait Posture
(2010)
R. Shultz et al.
Quantifying skin motion artifact error of the hindfoot and forefoot marker clusters with the optical tracking of a multi-segment foot model using single-plane fluoroscopy
Gait Posture
(2011)
R. Shultz et al.
Determining the maximum diameter for holes in the shoe without compromising shoe integrity when using a multi-segment foot model
Med Eng Phys
(2012)
C. Bishop et al.
The reliability: accuracy and minimal detectable difference of a multi-segment kinematic model of the foot-shoe complex
Gait Posture
(2013)
A. Stacoff et al.
Lateral stability in sideward cutting movements
Med Sci Sports Exerc
(1996)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (35)

Comparison of skin and shoe marker placement on metatarsophalangeal joint kinematics and kinetics during running
2023, Journal of Biomechanics
This study investigated the effects of marker placement (skin- vs shoe-mounted) on metatarsophalangeal joint (MTP) kinematics and kinetics during running. Fifteen trained men ran on a 15-m track at 10 and 13 km/h with three (low, standard and high stiffness) shoe longitudinal bending stiffnesses (LBS). Reflective markers were fixed on the shoe upper, and on the skin using holes cut in the shoe. Three-dimensional marker positions and ground reaction forces were recorded at 200 and 2000 Hz, respectively. Kinematic and kinetic parameters were analyzed using one-dimensional metrics (statistical parametric mapping). MTP joint was less dorsiflexed at midstance ([57% to 100%] of braking phase and [0% to 48%] of pushing phase), and the MTP joint plantarflexion moment was higher ([22% to 55%] of pushing phase) with the shoe markerset in comparison with the skin markerset. The effect of LBS on MTP angle was found to be significant for a larger percentage of each stride using the shoe markerset compared to the skin markerset. However, the effect of LBS on plantarflexion moment was significant with the shoe markerset only. The effect of running speed on MTP angle was significant for a larger percentage of each stride with the skin markerset. This study demonstrates that the placement of markers influences the measurement of MTP kinematics and kinetics and that these effects are mediated by other variables such as LBS or running speed. It is concluded that the shoe markerset does not fully reflect the movement of the MTP joint.
The biomechanical effects of 3D printed and traditionally made foot orthoses in individuals with unilateral plantar fasciopathy and flat feet
2022, Gait and Posture
Citation Excerpt :
Initially, the minimum hole size was cut but progressively enlarged to allow the markers to be detected by the optical cameras. Finally, each hole was about 25 mm in diameter, which was still within acceptable limits [28]. However, this may have further reduced the integrity of the shoe.
Foot orthoses (FOs) are used to manage foot pathologies such as plantar fasciopathy. 3D printed custom-made FOs are increasingly being manufactured. Although these 3D-printed FOs look like traditionally heat-moulded FOs, there are few studies comparing FOs made using these two different manufacturing processes.
How effective are 3D-printed FOs (3D-Print) compared to traditionally-made (Traditional) or no FOs (Control), in changing biomechanical parameters of flat-footed individuals with unilateral plantar fasciopathy?
Thirteen participants with unilateral plantar fasciopathy walked with shoes under three conditions: Control, 3D-print, and Traditional. 2 × 3 repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVAs) with Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to compare discrete kinematic and kinetic variables between limbs and conditions. Waveform analyses were also conducted using statistical parametric mapping (SPM).
There was a significant condition main effect for arch height drop (p = 0.01; ηp² =0.54). There was 0.87 mm (95% CI [−1.84, −0.20]) less arch height drop in 3D-print compared to Traditional. The SPM analyses revealed condition main effects on ankle moment (p < 0.001) and ankle power (p < 0.001). There were significant differences between control condition and both 3D-print and Traditional conditions. For ankle moment and power, there were no differences between 3D-print and Traditional conditions.
3D-printed FOs are more effective in reducing arch height drop, whist both FOs lowered ankle plantarflexion moment and power compared to no FOs. The results support the use of 3D-printed FOs as being equally effective as traditionally-made FOs in changing lower limb biomechanics for a population of flat-footed individuals with unilateral plantar fasciopathy.
The interaction effects of rocker angle and apex location in rocker shoe design on foot biomechanics and Achilles tendon loading
2022, Medicine in Novel Technology and Devices
The influences of rocker shoes on foot biomechanics were controversial because the interaction between two design factors—rocker angle and apex location, was usually omitted. This study investigated the interaction effects of rocker angle and apex location on plantar foot pressure, metatarsophalangeal/ankle angle, and Achilles tendon force during walking. Ten participants performed walking trials under six rocker shoe conditions: 2 rocker angles (mild and severe) × 3 apex locations (distal, standard, and proximal), wherein the plantar foot pressure was measured and the movement data were processed by musculoskeletal modeling to report joint angle and Achilles tendon force. A two-way ANOVA repeated measures was used for statistics. Significant interaction effects were reported in examinations of forefoot pressure, midfoot pressure, and metatarsophalangeal dorsiflexion. The standard apex significantly reduced peak forefoot and midfoot pressures (p = 0.008–0.034, Hedges'g = 0.75–0.84), which was further decreased by a severe rocker angle (p = 0.006, Hedges'g = 0.51–0.81). Moving the apex proximally reduced Achilles tendon forces (p < 0.001, Hedges' g = 0.80) and facilitated both metatarsophalangeal dorsiflexion and ankle plantarflexion during push-off (p = 0.003–0.006, Hedges' g = 0.03–0.82). Rocker angle seemed to have fewer effects on ankle joint angle and Achilles tendon force. We concluded that apex location was likely the dominant design factor of the rocker sole in influencing foot biomechanics, yet its interactions with rocker angle should be considered. The configuration of the two features could be varied to possess different therapeutic merits and adapt to specific application purposes.
Foot Orthoses
2022, Foot and Ankle Biomechanics
A foot orthosis is a simple intervention that is often prescribed for a variety of musculoskeletal conditions affecting the foot and other parts of the body. These are used to alter the interface between the foot and the shoe as well as to change some aspect of foot and ankle biomechanics during activities of daily living, such as walking and running. This chapter will describe the design of these devices, their common features, and the materials used in their construction. Kinematic, kinetic, and other biomechanical effects of foot orthoses on the foot and ankle will be reviewed, along with common conditions for which they are prescribed together with their proposed mechanisms of action. Potential areas of future research will be discussed.
Understanding the role of foot biomechanics on regional foot orthosis deformation in flatfoot individuals during walking
2022, Gait and Posture
Foot orthoses (FOs) are one of the most common interventions to restore normal foot mechanics in flatfoot individuals. New technologies have made it possible to deliver customized FOs with complex designs for potentially better functionalities. However, translating the individuals’ biomechanical needs into the design of customized FOs is not yet fully understood.
Our objective was to identify whether the deformation of customized FOs is related to foot kinematics and plantar pressure during walking.
The kinematics of multi-segment foot and FOs contour were recorded together with plantar pressure in 17 flatfoot individuals while walking with customized FOs. The deformation of FOs surface was predicted from its contour kinematics using an artificial neural network. Plantar pressure map and deformation were divided into five anatomically based regions defined by the corresponding foot segments. Forward stepwise linear mixed models were built for each of the four gait phases to determine the feet-FOs interaction.
It was observed that some associations existed between foot kinematics and pressure with regional FOs deformation. From heel-strike to foot-flat, longitudinal arch angle was associated with FOs deformation in forefoot. From foot-flat to midstance, rearfoot eversion accounted for variation in the deformation of medial FOs regions, and forefoot abduction for the lateral regions. From midstance to heel-off, rearfoot eversion, longitudinal arch angle, and plantar pressure played significant role in deformation. Finally, from heel-off to toe-off, forefoot adduction affected the deformation of forefoot and midfoot.
This study provides guidelines for designing customized FOs. Flatfoot individuals with excessive rearfoot eversion or very flexible medial arches require more support on medial FOs regions, while the ones with excessive forefoot abduction need the support on lateral regions. However, a compromise should be made between the level of support and the level of increase in plantar pressure to avoid stress on foot structures.
Comparison between the Rizzoli and Oxford foot models with independent and clustered tracking markers
2022, Gait and Posture
The Rizzoli Foot Model (RFM) and Oxford Foot Model (OFM) are used to analyze segmented foot kinematics with independent tracking markers. Alternatively, rigid marker clusters can be used to improve markers’ visualization and facilitate analyzing shod gait.
Are there differences in angles from the RFM and OFM, obtained with independent and clustered tracking markers, during the stance phase of walking?
Walking kinematics of 14 non-disabled participants (25.2 years (SD 2.8)) were measured at self-selected speed. Rearfoot-shank and forefoot-rearfoot angles were measured from two models with two tracking methods: RFM, OFM, RFM-cluster, and OFM-cluster. In RFM-cluster and OFM-cluster, the rearfoot and forefoot tracking markers were rigidly clustered, fixed on rods’ tips attached to a metallic base. Statistical Parametric Mapping (SPM) One-Way Repeated Measures ANOVAs and SPM Paired t-tests were used to compare waveforms. Coefficients of Multiple Correlation (CMC) quantified the similarity between waveforms. One-way Repeated Measures ANOVAs were conducted to compare the ranges of motion (ROMs), and pre-planned contrasts investigated differences between the models and tracking methods. Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC) were computed to verify the similarity between ROMs.
Differences occurred mostly in small parts of the stance phase for the cluster vs. non-cluster comparisons and the RFM vs. OFM comparisons. ROMs were slightly different between the models and tracking methods in most comparisons. The curves (CMC ≥ 0.71) were highly similar between the models and tracking methods. The ROMs (ICC ≥ 0.67) were moderatetly to highly similar in most comparisons. RFM vs. RFM-cluster (forefoot-rearfoot angle - transverse plane), OFM vs. OFM-cluster and RFM vs. OFM (forefoot-rearfoot angle - frontal plane) were not similar (non-significant).
Rigid clusters are an alternative for tracking rearfoot-shank and forefoot-rearfoot angles during the stance phase of walking. However, specific differences should be considered to contrast results from different models and tracking methods.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Short CommunicationA method to investigate the effect of shoe-hole size on surface marker movement when describing in-shoe joint kinematics using a multi-segment foot model

Highlights

Abstract

Introduction

Section snippets

Participants

Data collection

Results

Discussion

Funding

Acknowledgment

Gait Posture

Gait Posture

Gait Posture

Med Eng Phys

Gait Posture

Lateral stability in sideward cutting movements

Med Sci Sports Exerc

Short Communication
A method to investigate the effect of shoe-hole size on surface marker movement when describing in-shoe joint kinematics using a multi-segment foot model