Advertisement

The evaluation of plantar pressure distribution in obese and non-obese adults

      Abstract

      Background. Although previous studies have generally reported increased plantar pressure values with obesity, none of these studies has classified the obesity. Our aim in this study was to compare the plantar pressure distribution in obese and control adults during standing and walking.
      Methods. This study was performed on 100 feet of 50 study participants. The subjects gathered in two groups, each containing 25 study participants, as non-obese and class 1 obese according to their body mass index values. Static and dynamic pedobarographic evaluations were performed during standing and walking. The findings were compared between the groups and also the correlation of body mass index with the pedobarographic parameters was assessed.
      Findings. The static pedobarographic evaluation revealed significantly higher values in terms of forefoot peak pressure, total plantar force and total contact area in the feet of class 1 obese subjects when only middle foot peak pressure was found to be higher in class 1 obese subjects than controls as a dynamic pedobarographic parameter. Among the static parameters body mass index was found to have positive correlation with total plantar force (r = 0.50, P = 0.000) and total contact area (r = 0.33, P = 0.019). Only middle foot peak pressure (r = 0.32, P = 0.025) among the dynamic pedobarographic parameters had positive correlation with body mass index.
      Interpretation. This study may be a first step to evaluate the effect of different obesity categories on the plantar pressure values. Further studies are needed to investigate the effect of different obesity grades.

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Clinical Biomechanics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Dowling A.M.
        • Steele J.R.
        • Baur L.A.
        Does obesity influence foot structure and plantar pressure patterns in prepubescent children?.
        Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 2001; 25: 845-852
        • Drerup B.
        • Tilkorn D.
        • Wetz H.H.
        Effect of weight load and carrying conditions on plantar peak.
        Orthopade. 2003; 32: 207-212
        • Gravante G.
        • Russo G.
        • Pomara F.
        • Ridola C.
        Comparison of ground reaction forces between obese and control young adults during quiet standing on a baropodometric platform.
        Clin. Biomech. 2003; 18: 780-782
        • Hennig E.M.
        • Milani T.L.
        The tripod support of the foot distribution under static and dynamic loading.
        Z. Orthop. Ihre Grenzgeb. 1993; 131: 279-284
        • Hennig E.M.
        • Rosenbaum D.
        Plantar pressure distribution patterns of young school children in comparison adults.
        Foot Ankle. 1994; 15: 35-40
        • Hills A.P.
        • Hennig E.M.
        • McDonald M.
        • Bar-Or O.
        Plantar pressure differences between obese and non-obese adults: a biomechanical analysis.
        Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 2001; 25: 1674-1679
        • Hills A.P.
        • Hennig E.M.
        • Byrne N.M.
        • Steele J.R.
        The biomechanics of adiposity—structural and functional limitations of obesity and implications for movement.
        Obes. Rev. 2002; 3: 35-43
        • Kitaoka H.B.
        • Alexander I.J.
        • Adelaar R.S.
        • Nunley J.A.
        • Myerson M.S.
        • Sanders M.
        Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes.
        Foot Ankle Int. 1994; 15: 349-353
        • Kushner R.F.
        • Roth J.L.
        Assessment of the obese patient.
        Endocrinol. Metab. Clin. North Am. 2003; 32: 915-933
        • Lohmander L.S.
        • Felson D.
        Can we identify a ‘high risk’ patient profile to determine who will experience rapid progression of osteoarthritis?.
        Osteoarthr. Cartilage. 2004; 12: S49-S52
        • Nyska M.
        • Linge K.
        • McCabe C.
        • Klenerman L.
        The adaptation of the foot to heavy loads: plantar foot pressures study.
        Clin. Biomech. 1997; 12: 8
        • Ogden C.L.
        • Carroll M.D.
        • Flegal K.M.
        Epidemiologic trends in overweight and obesity.
        Endocrinol. Metab. Clin. North Am. 2003; 32: 741-760
      1. Operating Manual Mini-Emed System, 1991. Novel, Munich

        • Pi-Sunyer F.X.
        Obesity.
        Endocrinol. Metab. Clin. North Am. 2003; 32: xiii-xiv
        • Riddiford-Harland D.L.
        • Steele J.R.
        • Storlien L.H.
        Does obesity influence foot structure in prepubescent children?.
        Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 2000; 24: 541-544
        • Vela S.A.
        • Lavery L.A.
        • Armstrong D.G.
        • Anaim A.A.
        The effect of increased weight on peak pressures: implications for obesity and diabetic foot pathology.
        J. Foot Ankle Surg. 1998; 37 (448–449): 416-420