TY - JOUR
T1 - Consistency of Visual Assessments of Arch Height among Clinicians
AU - Cowan, David N.
AU - Robinson, John R.
AU - Jones, Bruce H.
AU - Polly, David W.
AU - Berrey, B. Hudson
PY - 1994/4
Y1 - 1994/4
N2 - Flat feet and high-arched feet have been cited as risk factors for musculoskeletal injury and functional problems among runners and other active individuals, although there are no established quantitative definitions or measures for assessing either condition. As part of a larger study, four-plane photographs were made of the weight-bearing right foot of 246 young male Army trainees. These photographs were independently evaluated by six clinicians and rated on a scale of clearly flat-footed (category 1) to clearly high arched (category 5). There was much interclinician variability in the assessments, even for extremes of foot type. The probability of a clinician assessing a foot as clearly flat, given that another clinician had rated the foot as clearly flat, ranged from 0.32 to 0.79, with a median probability of 0.57, while for clearly high-arched feet, probabilities ranged from 0.0 to 1.00, with a median of 0.17. These findings demonstrate the need for objective standards and quantitative methods of evaluating foot morphology.
AB - Flat feet and high-arched feet have been cited as risk factors for musculoskeletal injury and functional problems among runners and other active individuals, although there are no established quantitative definitions or measures for assessing either condition. As part of a larger study, four-plane photographs were made of the weight-bearing right foot of 246 young male Army trainees. These photographs were independently evaluated by six clinicians and rated on a scale of clearly flat-footed (category 1) to clearly high arched (category 5). There was much interclinician variability in the assessments, even for extremes of foot type. The probability of a clinician assessing a foot as clearly flat, given that another clinician had rated the foot as clearly flat, ranged from 0.32 to 0.79, with a median probability of 0.57, while for clearly high-arched feet, probabilities ranged from 0.0 to 1.00, with a median of 0.17. These findings demonstrate the need for objective standards and quantitative methods of evaluating foot morphology.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028273010&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028273010&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/107110079401500411
DO - 10.1177/107110079401500411
M3 - Article
C2 - 7951957
AN - SCOPUS:0028273010
SN - 1071-1007
VL - 15
SP - 213
EP - 217
JO - Foot & Ankle International
JF - Foot & Ankle International
IS - 4
ER -