Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31837710›Full record

Trial reportBMC musculoskeletal disorders2019

Functional assessments of foot strength: a comparative and repeatability study.

Dustin A Bruening, Sarah T Ridge, Julia L Jacobs, Mark T Olsen, Dallin W Griffin, Drew H Ferguson, Kirk E Bassett, A Wayne Johnson

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dustin A BrueningExercise Sciences Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA. dabruening@byu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3815-6089
Sarah T RidgeExercise Sciences Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
Julia L JacobsExercise Sciences Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
Mark T OlsenExercise Sciences Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
Dallin W GriffinExercise Sciences Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
Drew H FergusonExercise Sciences Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
Kirk E BassettMechanical Engineering Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
A Wayne JohnsonExercise Sciences Department, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA.
Brigham Young University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEvaluating the strength of the small muscles of the foot may be useful in a variety of clinical applications but is challenging from a methodology standpoint. Previous efforts have focused primarily on the functional movement of toe flexion, but clear methodology guidelines are lacking. A novel foot doming test has also been proposed, but not fully evaluated. The purposes of the present study were to assess the repeatability and comparability of several functional foot strength assessment techniques.

methodsForty healthy volunteers were evaluated across two testing days, with a two-week doming motion practice period between them. Seven different measurements were taken using a custom toe flexion dynamometer (seated), custom doming dynamometer (standing), and a pressure mat (standing). Measurements from the doming dynamometer were evaluated for reliability (ICCs) and a learning effect (paired t-tests), while measurements from the toe flexion dynamometer and pressure mat were evaluated for reliability and comparability (correlations). Electromyography was also used to descriptively assess the extent of muscle isolation in all measurements.

resultsDoming showed excellent within-session reliability (ICCs > 0.944), but a clear learning effect was present, with strength (p < 0.001) and muscle activity increasing between sessions. Both intrinsic and extrinsic muscles were engaged during this test. All toe flexion tests also showed excellent reliability (ICCs > 0.945). Seated toe flexion tests using the dynamometer were moderately correlated to standing toe flexion tests on a pressure mat (r > 0.54); however, there were some differences in muscle activity. The former may better isolate the toe flexors, while the latter appeared to be more functional for many pathologies. On the pressure mat, reciprocal motion appeared to display slightly greater forces and reliability than isolated toe flexion.

conclusionsThis study further refines potential methodology for foot strength testing. These devices and protocols can be duplicated in the clinic to evaluate and monitor rehabilitation progress in clinical populations associated with foot muscle weakness.

Indexed as

Muscle StrengthMuscle Strength DynamometerAdultElectromyographyFemaleFootHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleReproducibility of ResultsToe JointYoung AdultDomingExtrinsic foot musclesIntrinsic foot musclesShort foot exerciseToe flexion

Identifiers

PMID31837710
PMCPMC6911702
OpenAlexW2995669833

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.