Regional peak plantar pressures are highly sensitive to region boundary definitions

Journal of Biomechanics

Volumn 41, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 2772-2775

  Pataky, Todd C ^a   Caravaggi, Paolo ^a   Savage, Russell ^a   Crompton, Robin H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Foot locomotion biomechanics; Pedobarography; Plantar pressure measurement; Subsampling

Indexed keywords

CHLORINE COMPOUNDS; COPYING; KNOWLEDGE BASED SYSTEMS; LOCATION; PIXELS;

ANATOMICAL REGIONS; BOUNDARY DEFINITION; COMMERCIAL SOFTWARES; FOOT LOCOMOTION BIOMECHANICS; GEOMETRIC PROPERTIES; HIGHLY SENSITIVE; PEAK PRESSURES; PEDOBAROGRAPHY; PLANTAR PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; PLANTAR PRESSURES; PRESSURE DATA; PRESSURE FIELDS; REGION BOUNDARIES; STATISTICAL INFERENCES; SUBSAMPLING;

SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; FOOT; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; IMAGE ANALYSIS; NORMAL HUMAN; PRESSURE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; WALKING;

ADULT; FOOT; GAIT; HUMANS; MALE; MANOMETRY; PRESSURE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; WALKING;

CHLORINE COMPOUNDS; COMPUTER PROGRAMS; DATA PROCESSING; PRESSURE CONTROL; PROBABILITY; REPROGRAPHY; RESOLUTION; SAMPLING; SENSITIVITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 49449102271     PISSN: 00219290     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.06.029     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Alexander I.J., Chao E.Y., and Johnson K.A. The assessment of dynamic foot-to-ground contact forces and plantar pressure distribution: a review of the evolution of current techniques and clinical applications. Foot and Ankle 11 3 (1990) 152-167
2. Conover W.J. Practical Nonparametric Statistics (1971), Wiley, New York pp. 256-263
3. Everitt B.S., and Dunn G. Applied Multivariate Data Analysis (2001), Arnold, London pp. 222-224
4. Haralick R.M., and Shapiro L.G. Computer and Robot Vision (1992), Addison-Wesley, Reading pp. 556-558
5. Harrison A.J., and Hillard P.J. A moment-based technique for the automatic spatial alignment of plantar pressure data. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers 214 (2000) 257-264
6. Johnson N.L., Kotz S., and Kemp A.W. Univariate Discrete Distributions. second ed (1992), Wiley, New York pp. 124-130
7. Martinez-Nova A., Cuevas-Garcia J.C., Pascual-Huerta J., and Sanchez-Rodriguez R. BioFoot in-shoe system: normal values and assessment of the reliability and repeatability. The Foot 17 (2007) 190-196
8. Putti A.B., Arnold G.P., Cochrane L.A., and Abboud R.J. Normal pressure values and repeatability of the Emed ST4 system. Gait and Posture 27 3 (2008) 501-505
9. Richter M., Frink M., Zech S., Geerling J., Droste P., Knobloch K., and Krettek. C. Technique for intraoperative use of pedobarography. Techniques in Foot and Ankle Surgery 5 2 (2006) 88-100
10. Rosenbaum D., and Becker H.P. Plantar pressure distribution measurements: technical background and clinical applications. Foot and Ankle Surgery 3 (1997) 1-14
11. Taylor A.J., Menz H.B., and Keenan A.M. The influence of walking speed on plantar pressure measurements using the two-step gait initiation protocol. Foot 14 (2004) 49-55
12. Vincenzo B., McPoil T., and Buckland S. Plantar foot pressures after the augmented low dye taping technique. Journal of Athletic Training 42 3 (2007) 374-380
13. Wong P., Chamari K., Chaouachi A., Mao D., Wisloff U., and Hong Y. Difference in plantar pressure between the preferred and nonpreferred feet in four soccer-related movements. British Journal of Sports Medicine 41 (2007) 84-92