ArticleChinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi2023
A foot structure study of new arch flexibility grading system based on three-dimensional arch volume.
Article in Chinese journal of traumatology = Zhonghua chuang shang za zhi, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDifferent arch structures may cause different foot function injuries. In the past, the arch structure and flexibility of the foot were often defined by the height of the arch, and there was no three-dimensional (3D) structure classification method. In order to form a more complete 3D description, we propose a new classification system of arch volume flexibility (AVF), and then use this new classification system to investigate the relationship between the AVF and arch index (AI), and the arch height flexibility (AHF) and AI, respectively.
methodsIt is proposed to recruit 180 young male adults for the test. We obtained arch volume and AI through 3D scanning and obtained the navicular height through manual measurement. Based on these data, we calculated the AHF and the AVF. Using the quintile method, these arches are divided into very stiff, stiff, neutral, flexible, and very flexible. According to AI value, all arches were divided into cavus, rectus, and planus. The distribution of AVF was compared using χ
resultsAll participants' plantar data was obtained through 3D scanning, but only 159 of them were complete, so only 318 feet had valid data. The left AHF is (21.23 ± 12.91) mm/kN, and the right AHF is (21.71 ± 12.69) mm/kN. The AVF of the left foot arch is (207.35 ± 118.28) mm
conclusionIn cavus, rectus, and planus, different AVF accounts different percentage, but the difference is not statistically significant. AVF is evenly distributed in the arches of the feet at different heights. We further found the relationship between AHF and AVF is not significant. As a 3D index, AVF may be able to describe the flexibility of the arch more comprehensively than AHF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.