4.1 Article

Pes planus and pes cavus in Southern Italy: a 5 years study

Journal

ANNALI DELL ISTITUTO SUPERIORE DI SANITA
Volume 53, Issue 2, Pages 142-145

Publisher

EDITRICE KURTIS S R L
DOI: 10.4415/ANN_17_02_10

Keywords

epidemiology; prevalence study; Italy; pes cavus; pes planus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction. Baropodometrical digital techniques map the pressures exerted on the foot plant during both static and dynamic loadings. The study of the distribution of such pressures makes it possible to evaluate the postural and locomotory biomechanics together with its pathological variations. Methods. From January 2011 to August 2016 we conducted a cross sectional study in order to diagnose flatfoot and hollowfoot through the baropodometric analysis, and collecting additional information such as gender and the age. 7816 static and dynamic baropodometric tests and radiological exams of the spine in different positions were performed in order to detect, evaluate and verify the presence of spine pathologies or postural disorders. 978 patients were screened for suspected foot deformities: 668 cases of hollow feet and 310 of flat feet were diagnosed. Results. Dividing patients in younger and older (> 60 years) according to WHO, there is a statistically significant difference in the prevalence of hollow feet and flat feet (p < 0.01): the young age is a risk factor for flat feet (OR = 1.61 CI 95% 1.22-2.11) but protective for hollow feet (OR = 0.62 CI 95% 0.47-0.81). There is a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01) due to sex in the prevalence of hollow feet (OR = 0.44 CI 95% 0.33-0.59) and flat feet (OR = 2.23 CI 95% 1.68-2.98): to be a man is a preventive factor for hollow feet, but a risk factor for flat feet. Conclusions. Flatfoot and hollowfoot represent a serious public health problem which is related to working life because these deformities negatively influence the productivity of employees and the quality of life of affected patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available