Table 4.
Common foot variables in participants with KOA (data reported as mean ± standard deviation)
| Foot variables | Study, year | Instrument- Shod condition | Results | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KOA | Controls | ||||
| Foot Progression Angle or toe-out degree (0) | Bechard et al., 2012 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Wearing lab shoes | 6.2 ± 6.1 | 9.4 ± 5.0 | 0.68 |
| Booij et al., 2020 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | −40.12 ± 4.80 | No controls | NA | |
| Chang et al., 2007 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 18.1 ± 8.4 | No controls | NA | |
| Guo et al., 2007 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Wearing lab shoes | 2.0 ± 6.8 | No controls | NA | |
| Hinman et al., 2012 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Wearing lab shoes | −6.06 ± 5.56 | No controls | NA | |
| Khan et al., 2019 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 9.6 ± 3.7 | No controls | NA | |
| Krackow et al., 2011 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 8.58 ± 2.37 | 15.36 ± 2.12 | NR | |
| Paquette et al., 2015 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 13 ± 4 | 12.2 ± 3.5 | 0.82 | |
| Rutherford et al., 2008 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 7.5 ± 5 | 7.3 ± 5 | NA | |
| Rutherford et al., 2010 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 6.6 ± 7.3 | 4.9 ± 4.7 | 0.625 | |
| Simic et al., 2013 | 3D motion analysis system- Wearing lab shoes | −4.5 ± 1.5 | No controls | NA | |
| Trombini-Souza et al., 2011 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 12.2 ± 6.74 | 13.1 ± 7.90 | 0.71 | |
| Peak rearfoot eversion (0) | Arnold et al., 2014 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform – Barefoot | 5.3 ± 4.2 | 4.5 ± 5.0 | 0.850 |
| Butler et al., 2009 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Wearing lab shoes | 3.5 ± 4.3 | No controls | NA | |
| Butler et al., 2011 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Wearing lab shoes | 6.2 ± 5.0 | 3.5 ± 2.7 | 0.01* | |
| Chapman et al., 2015 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Wearing lab shoes | 3.51 ± 2.77 | No controls | NA | |
| Erhart-Hledik et al., 2017 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Wearing lab shoes | 13.9 ± 5.4 | No controls | NA | |
| Levinger et al., 2012 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 1.3 ± 5.2 | 2.3 ± 3.9 | NR | |
| Nigg et al., 2006 | Biodex system- Wearing lab shoes | 41.9 | No controls | NA | |
| Peak rearfoot inversion (0) | Arnold et al., 2014 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 1.4 ± 4.4 | 1.1 ± 4.2 | 0.708 |
| Levinger et al., 2012 | 3D motion analysis system, force platform- Barefoot | 11.6 ± 5.2 | 14.9 ± 5.0 | NR | |
| Nigg et al., 2006 | Biodex system- Wearing lab shoes | 45.1 | No controls | NA | |
| Pes planus prevalence (%) | Abourazzak et al., 2014 | Visual observation (FPI)- Barefoot | 42 | 22 | 0.03* |
| Guler et al., 2009 | Objective manual testing- Barefoot | 38.3 | No controls | NA | |
| Foot pronation (difference in FPI) | Abourazzak et al., 2014 | Visual observation (FPI)- Barefoot | 1.5 ± 2.68 | 0.72 ± 2.63 | 0.05* |
| Levinger et al., 2010 | Visual observation (FPI)- Barefoot | 2.46 ± 2.18 | 1.35 ± 1.43 | 0.022* | |
*Statistically significant p-value at 95% confidence interval
Abbreviations: 3D three dimensional, FPI foot posture index, KOA knee osteoarthritis, NA not applicable, NR not reported