IJAR.2023.165
Type of Article: Original Research
Volume 11; Issue 3 (September 2023)
Page No.: 8699-8704
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2023.165
An Analysis of Foot Morphology Using a Self-Designed Foot Scanner in Preparing Custom-Made Footwear: An Anatomical Approach
K. Vijayakumar *1, Pranali Pal 2, T. Vijayasagar 3.
*1 Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, Symbiosis Medical College for Women, Symbiosis International (Deemed) University (SIU) Pune, Maharashtra, India. ORCiD: 0000-0003-3032-8974
2 Tutor, Department of Anatomy, Symbiosis Medical College for Women, Symbiosis International (Deemed) University (SIU) Pune, Maharashtra, India. ORCiD: NA
3 Dean, Symbiosis Medical College for Women, Symbiosis International (Deemed) University (SIU) Pune, Maharashtra, India. ORCiD: 0000-0002-0569-2662
Corresponding Author: Dr. K. Vijayakumar, Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, Symbiosis Medical College for Women, Symbiosis International (Deemed) University (SIU) Pune, Maharashtra, India. E-Mail: kvijay.india@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Foot morphology and morphometry knowledge is vital in several domains. 60% of the population has foot pain due to ill-fitting footwear. There is no standard device or parameters to evaluate the arches of the foot, and most of the research to assess the arches of the foot. Aim of the study: The study aimed to develop a hodoscope (foot scanner) device to evaluate the arches of the foot. The study’s objective was to prepare custom–made footwear based on foot morphology. The study included 849 (405 males and 444 females) participants aged between 25 and 45. Podoscope was used to evaluate the arches of the foot. Based on the evaluation, 62 participants were provided with custom-made footwear based on the morphometry of the foot. The statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test was used to analyze the pain scale based on positive ranks, with a statistically significant p-value (< 0.001). Results: 44.19% of men and 47.97% of women had a normal arch foot. 33.08% of men and 28.82% of women had a flat arch, and 22.71% of men and 23.19% of women had a high arch foot. The present study identified foot problems (forefoot, midfoot and hindfoot) using a self-designed podoscope and attempted to design custom–made footwear based on foot morphometry. The quality of the footwear was acceptable and cost-effective. Custom-made footwear based on foot morphology will benefit individuals with foot problems.
KEYWORDS: Foot Morphology, Self-Designed Foot Scanner, Custom-Made Footwear, Podoscope.
REFERENCES
[1]. Bennett, M., Harris, J., Richmond, B., Braun, D., Mbua, E., Kiura, P., Olago, D., Kibunjia, M., Omuombo, C., Behrensmeyer, A., Huddart, D. and Gonzalez, S. Early Hominin Foot Morphology Based on 1.5-Million-Year-Old Footprints from Ileret, Kenya. Science 2009;323(5918):1197-1201.
[2]. Lovett HW, Dane J. The affections of the arch of the foot commonly classified as flat-foot. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. 1896;8(1):78–92.
[3]. Jahss, M. Spontaneous Rupture of the Tibialis Posterior Tendon: Clinical Findings, Tenographic Studies, and a New Technique of Repair. Foot & Ankle 1982;3(3):158-166.
[4]. Garrow AP, Silman AJ, Macfarlane GJ. The Cheshire Foot Pain and Disability Survey: a population survey assessing prevalence and associations. Pain. 2004 Jul;110(1-2):378-84.
[5]. Gorter, K., Kuyvenhoven, M. and de Melker, R. Nontraumatic foot complaints in older people. A population-based survey of risk factors, mobility, and well-being. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association 2000;90(8):397-402.
[6]. Hawes M, Nachbauer W, Sovak D, Nigg B. Footprint Parameters as a Measure of Arch Height. Foot & Ankle. 1992;13(1):22-26.
[7]. Forriol F, Pascual J. Footprint analysis between three and seventeen years of age. Foot Ankle Int 1990;11(2):101–4.
[8]. Queen R, Mall N, Hardaker W, Nunley J. Describing the Medial Longitudinal Arch Using Footprint Indices and a Clinical Grading System. Foot & Ankle International. 2007;28(4):456-462.
[9]. Kaufman KR, Brodine SK, Shaffer RA, Johnson CW, Cullison TR. The effect of foot structure and range of motion on musculoskeletal overuse injuries. Am J Sports Med 1999;27:585–593.
[10]. Johnson KA, Strom DE. Tibialis posterior tendon dysfunction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;239:196–206.
[11]. Abousayed, M., Tartaglione, J., Rosenbaum, A. and Dipreta, J. Classifications in Brief: Johnson and Strom Classification of Adult-acquired Flatfoot Deformity. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 2015;474(2):588-593.
[12]. Chang, C., Chen, Y., Yang, W., Ho, P., Hwang, A., Chen, C., Chang, J. and Chang, L. Flatfoot Diagnosis by a Unique Bimodal Distribution of Footprint Index in Children. PLoS ONE 2014;9(12):e115808.
[13]. Butterworth PA, Landorf KB, Smith SE, Menz HB. The association between body mass index and musculoskeletal foot disorders: A systematic review. Obes Rev 2012; 13: 630–642.
[14]. Vijayakumar, K.; Senthilkumar, S.1; Chandratre, Soham G.2; Bharambe, Vaishaly. An Analysis of Arches of the Foot: Grading the Severity of Pesplanus and Pescavus Using a Newly Designed Podoscope And Parameters. Journal of the Anatomical Society of India 2021;70(2):85-92.
[15]. Diply LD, Ashley RK, Gilbert RJ. Treatment of the congenital vertical talus:a retrospective review of 36 feet with long-term follow-up. Foot Ankle 1987;7:326–32.
[16]. Zimny, S., Schatz, H. and Pfohl, M. The Role of Limited Joint Mobility in Diabetic Patients With an At-Risk Foot. Diabetes Care 2004;27(4):942-946.
[17]. Hil, M., Friis, R., Michaelsen, M., Jakobsen, P. and Nielsen, R. Classification of the height and flexibility of the medial longitudinal arch of the foot. Journal of Foot and Ankle Research, 2005;5(1).
[18]. Wülker N. Hallux valgus – Hallux rigidus. Stuttgart: Enke. 1997:3–32.
