Toe flexor strength is associated with mobility in older adults with pronated and supinated feet but not with neutral feet.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biomechanical Phenomena
/ physiology
Evaluation Studies as Topic
Female
Foot
/ physiopathology
Hand Strength
/ physiology
Humans
Independent Living
/ statistics & numerical data
Male
Muscle Strength
/ physiology
Physical Functional Performance
Posture
/ physiology
Pronation
/ physiology
Supination
/ physiology
Toes
/ physiology
Walking Speed
/ physiology
Ageing
Comfortable walking speed
Foot alignment
Foot posture index
Functional performance
Toe grip strength
Journal
Journal of foot and ankle research
ISSN: 1757-1146
Titre abrégé: J Foot Ankle Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101471610
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Sep 2020
11 Sep 2020
Historique:
received:
19
05
2020
accepted:
20
08
2020
entrez:
11
9
2020
pubmed:
12
9
2020
medline:
30
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Older adults are known to have more pronated foot posture and decreased toe flexor strength (TFS), as well as decreased mobility in daily life compared to young adults. Although foot posture is reported to be an influential factor for walking biomechanics in young adults, there is less information on this subject in older adults. Age-related reduction in TFS is shown to be associated with impairments of functional performance, but it is poorly understood whether foot posture influences the relationships between TFS and functional performances. Therefore, the present study aimed to elucidate this concern by examining older women. Seventy community-dwelling older women (76.8 ± 4.4 years) voluntarily participated in this study. Foot posture was evaluated by the 6-item foot posture index (FPI). Based on the FPI score, participants were allocated to pronated, neutral, or supinated group (n = 33, 26, and 11, respectively). TFS was assessed using a toe grip dynamometer in a seated position. Scores of 30-s chair stand, timed up-and-go, 5-m comfortable-speed walking, and static balance tests were determined to evaluate functional performances. Pearson's correlation coefficients were computed to examine the relationships between TFS and functional performances in each group. TFS positively correlated with comfortable walking speed in the pronated (r = 0.37, p = 0.03) and supinated (r = 0.76, p < 0.001) groups, but not in the neutral group (r = 0.17, p = 0.42). For the two significant relationships, an analysis of covariance showed that there was no significant difference between the pronated and supinated groups in the slopes of the regression lines, suggesting a similar relative contribution of TFS to comfortable walking speed between the two groups. In addition, TFS tended to negatively correlate with timed up-and-go time in the pronated (r = - 0.32, p = 0.07) and supinated (r = - 0.56, p = 0.08) groups, and positively correlate with 30-s chair stand score in the pronated group (r = 0.31, p = 0.08). The present study indicates that TFS would be associated with mobility, walking performance in particular, in older women with pronated and supinated feet but not with neutral feet.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Older adults are known to have more pronated foot posture and decreased toe flexor strength (TFS), as well as decreased mobility in daily life compared to young adults. Although foot posture is reported to be an influential factor for walking biomechanics in young adults, there is less information on this subject in older adults. Age-related reduction in TFS is shown to be associated with impairments of functional performance, but it is poorly understood whether foot posture influences the relationships between TFS and functional performances. Therefore, the present study aimed to elucidate this concern by examining older women.
METHODS
METHODS
Seventy community-dwelling older women (76.8 ± 4.4 years) voluntarily participated in this study. Foot posture was evaluated by the 6-item foot posture index (FPI). Based on the FPI score, participants were allocated to pronated, neutral, or supinated group (n = 33, 26, and 11, respectively). TFS was assessed using a toe grip dynamometer in a seated position. Scores of 30-s chair stand, timed up-and-go, 5-m comfortable-speed walking, and static balance tests were determined to evaluate functional performances. Pearson's correlation coefficients were computed to examine the relationships between TFS and functional performances in each group.
RESULTS
RESULTS
TFS positively correlated with comfortable walking speed in the pronated (r = 0.37, p = 0.03) and supinated (r = 0.76, p < 0.001) groups, but not in the neutral group (r = 0.17, p = 0.42). For the two significant relationships, an analysis of covariance showed that there was no significant difference between the pronated and supinated groups in the slopes of the regression lines, suggesting a similar relative contribution of TFS to comfortable walking speed between the two groups. In addition, TFS tended to negatively correlate with timed up-and-go time in the pronated (r = - 0.32, p = 0.07) and supinated (r = - 0.56, p = 0.08) groups, and positively correlate with 30-s chair stand score in the pronated group (r = 0.31, p = 0.08).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The present study indicates that TFS would be associated with mobility, walking performance in particular, in older women with pronated and supinated feet but not with neutral feet.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32912250
doi: 10.1186/s13047-020-00422-y
pii: 10.1186/s13047-020-00422-y
pmc: PMC7488436
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
55Références
Gait Posture. 2008 Feb;27(2):331-9
pubmed: 17583511
Age Ageing. 2000 Sep;29(5):441-6
pubmed: 11108417
Age Ageing. 1997 Jan;26(1):15-9
pubmed: 9143432
J Foot Ankle Res. 2014 May 05;7:26
pubmed: 24955128
Int J Lepr Other Mycobact Dis. 2002 Mar;70(1):16-24
pubmed: 12120036
J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2014 Oct 08;11:143
pubmed: 25297707
J Foot Ankle Res. 2014 Dec 19;7(1):55
pubmed: 25558288
Gait Posture. 2007 Jun;26(1):68-75
pubmed: 16945538
Gerontology. 2018;64(1):11-18
pubmed: 28918423
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2002 Jun;57(6):M392-7
pubmed: 12023269
J Foot Ankle Res. 2014 May 13;7:28
pubmed: 24855492
Gait Posture. 2014 Feb;39(2):689-94
pubmed: 24183676
J Aging Phys Act. 2016 Jul;24(3):459-64
pubmed: 26796741
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006 Aug;61(8):866-70
pubmed: 16912106
Gait Posture. 2015 Jun;42(1):27-31
pubmed: 25891528
J Foot Ankle Res. 2008 Jul 31;1(1):6
pubmed: 18822155
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2005 Dec;60(12):1546-52
pubmed: 16424286
J Foot Ankle Res. 2009 Nov 26;2:35
pubmed: 19939283
J Biomech. 2008;41(7):1520-7
pubmed: 18420214
Phys Ther. 2003 Mar;83(3):237-52
pubmed: 12620088
Gait Posture. 2014;40(1):48-52
pubmed: 24630465
Gait Posture. 2013 Mar;37(3):445-51
pubmed: 23107625
Am J Sports Med. 2001 May-Jun;29(3):304-10
pubmed: 11394600
Hum Mov Sci. 2011 Feb;30(1):105-14
pubmed: 21220174
J Foot Ankle Res. 2010 Jun 16;3:9
pubmed: 20550714
Foot (Edinb). 2018 Dec;37:85-90
pubmed: 30326417
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2010 Jun;46(2):183-220
pubmed: 20485224
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2003 Nov-Dec;42(6):327-33
pubmed: 14688773
J Biomech. 2019 Mar 6;85:1-5
pubmed: 30712779
Gait Posture. 2008 Jul;28(1):29-37
pubmed: 17988870
Gait Posture. 2013 Mar;37(3):408-12
pubmed: 23018027
Gait Posture. 2014 Feb;39(2):789-92
pubmed: 24220205
J Foot Ankle Res. 2015 May 02;8:18
pubmed: 25972928
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1964 Apr;46:469-81
pubmed: 14131426
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:385269
pubmed: 26583104
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2009 Dec;24(10):787-91
pubmed: 19751956