The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery

The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery

Effect of Medial Longitudinal Arch Height of the Foot on Static and Dynamic Balance in 7-10-Year-Old Boy Gymnasts

Document Type : RESEARCH PAPER

Authors
Mohammad Seyedahmadi 1
Karim Khalaghi 2
Sahar Hazrati 2
Fahimeh Keavanloo 3
1 Department of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Humanities, Velayat University, Iranshahr, Iran
2 Department of Sport Sciences, Hakim Nizami Qochan Institute of Higher Education, Quchan, Khorasan Razavi Province, Iran
3 Department of Sports Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Iranshahr Branch, Iranshahr, Iran
10.22038/abjs.2024.79775.3645
Abstract
Objectives: This research aims to investigate the relationship between the height of the internal 
longitudinal arch of the foot and the static and dynamic balance of 7 -10-year-old boy gymnasts.
Methods: This study was descriptive-correlational, and its statistical population included male gymnast students 
aged 7 to 10 in the city of Gouchan. These gymnasts were screened for flat feet using the Brady test. Ninety 
gymnasts were purposefully selected based on the Brody test to assess the arch of the foot and were divided into 
three groups: pronation (n=30), supination (n=30), and normal (n=30). The Flamingo test assessed static balance, 
and the Y Balance test assessed dynamic balance. The Shapiro-Wilk test was used to check the normality of data 
distribution, and a one-way analysis of variance was employed to compare the results obtained among the groups. 
Data analysis was performed using SPSS software (version 21).
Results: The results showed a significant difference between static and dynamic balance in male gymnasts with 
pronation, supination, and natural foot conditions (P=0.001 and P=0.013, respectively). The results demonstrated 
no significant difference in static balance between gymnastic boys with pronation and suspension (P=0.930); 
however, there was a significant difference in static balance between gymnastic boys with suspension and those 
with a natural state (P=0.0001) and between gymnastic boys with pronation and those with a natural state of the 
foot (P=0.001).
Conclusion: Based on the results, gymnastic boys with different arch heights (pronated, supinated, natural) showed 
static and dynamic balance variations. Boys with pronated or supinated feet had poorer static and dynamic balance 
than those with natural arches. Based on these results, coaches and corrective movement specialists can help boy 
gymnasts with different arch heights to optimize their balance performance and reduce the risk of injury.
 Level of evidence: II
Keywords
Foot
Gymnast
Medial longitudinal arch height
Static and dynamic balance
Subjects
  1. Giansanti D, Dozza M, Chiari L, Maccioni G, Cappello A. Energetic assessment of trunk postural modifications induced by a wearable audio-biofeedback system. Med Eng Phys. 2009; 31(1):48-54. doi: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2008.04.004.
  2. Munro AG, Herrington LC. Between-session reliability of the star excursion balance test. Phys Ther Sport.2010; 11(4):128-32. doi: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2010.07.002.
  3. Horak FB. Clinical measurement of postural control in adults. Phys Ther. 1987; 67(12):1881-5. doi: 10.1093/ptj/67.12.1881.
  4. Ghasemi V. Comparison of dynamic balance in men with different foot and its relationship with morphological and anatomical features of the foot. 2009. University of Tehran (Doctoral dissertation, MS thesis). [In persian]).
  5. Carpes FP, Reinehr FB, Mota CB. Effects of a program for trunk strength and stability on pain, low back and pelvis kinematics, and body balance: a pilot study. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2008; 12(1):22-30. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2007.05.001.
  6. Lengkana AS, Rahman AA, Alif MN, Mulya G, Priana A, Hermawan DB. Static and dynamic balance learning in primary school students. International Journal of Human Movement and Sports Sciences. 2020; 8(6):469-476.
  7. Mahdieh F, Rajabi R, Aghayary A. Determination of foot arch index in deferent ages groups for men and women in Esfahan city. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences. 2014; 9(6).
  8. Williams SM, Lacy AC. Measurement and evaluation in physical education and exercise science. Routledge; 2018.
  9. Baghdadi T, Mazoochy H, Guiti MR, Heidari khabbaz N. Evaluation of Clinical and Radiological Results of Calcaneal Lengthening Osteotomy in Pediatric Idiopathic Flexible Flatfoot. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2018; 6(5):402-411. doi:10.22038/abjs.2018.26300.1695.
  10. Mousavian A, Sayyed-Hosseinian S-H, Shahpari O, et al. Reliability and Validity of the Persian Version of the Foot Function Index in Patients with Foot Disorders. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2019; 7(3):291-296. doi:10.22038/abjs.2019.37439.1988.
  11. Lin C-H, Lee H-Y, Chen J-JJ, Lee H-M, Kuo M-D. Development of a quantitative assessment system for correlation analysis of footprint parameters to postural control in children. Physiol Meas.2006; 27(2):119-30. doi: 10.1088/0967-3334/27/2/003.
  12. Beinabaji H, Anbarian M, Sokhangoue Y. The effect of flat foot on lower limb muscles activity pattern and plantar pressure characteristics during walking. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences. 2013; 8(8):1328-41. doi: 10.22122/jrrs.v8i8.537.
  13. Yazdani S, Dizaji E, Alizadeh F, Meamar R. Comparison of plantar peak pressure and time to peak pressure during normal walking between females with genu recurvatum and healthy controls. Scientific Journal of Kurdistan University of Medical Sciences. 2016; 21(4):107-17.
  14. Fan Y, Fan Y, Li Z, Lv C, Luo D. Natural gaits of the non-pathological flat foot and high-arched foot. PLoS One. 2011; 6(3):e17749. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017749.
  15. Eleswarapu AS, Yamini B, Bielski RJ. Evaluating the Cavus Foot. Pediatr Ann. 2016; 45(6):e218-22. doi:10.3928/00904481-20160426-01.
  16. Fernández-Seguín LM, Mancha JAD, Rodríguez RS, Martínez EE, Martín BG, Ortega JR. Comparison of plantar pressures and contact area between normal and cavus foot. Gait & posture. 2014; 39(2):789-792. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2013.10.018.
  17. Dwyer F. The present status of the problem of pes cavus. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1975 :( 106):254-75. doi: 10.1097/00003086-197501000-00038.
  18. San Tsung BY, Zhang M, Fan YB, Boone DA. Quantitative comparison of plantar foot shapes under different weight-bearing conditions. J Rehabil Res Dev.2003; 40(6):517-26. doi: 10.1682/jrrd.2003.11.0517.
  19. Razeghi M, Batt ME. Foot type classification: a critical review of current methods. Gait Posture.2002; 15(3):282-91. doi: 10.1016/s0966-6362(01)00151-5.
  20. Cote KP, Brunet ME, Gansneder BM, Shultz SJ. Effects of pronated and supinated foot postures on static and dynamic postural stability. J Athl Train. 2005; 40(1):41.
  21. Harrison PL, Littlewood C. Relationship between pes planus foot type and postural stability. Indian Journal of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy. 2010; 4(3):21-4.
  22. Satvati B, Karimi MT, Tahmasebi Boldaji R, Pool F. Standing stability evaluation in subjects with flat foot. Journal of research in rehabilitation sciences. 2013; 8(8):1277-84. doi: 10.22122/jrrs.v8i8.605.
  23. Tsai L-C, Yu B, Mercer VS, Gross MT. Comparison of different structural foot types for measures of standing postural control. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2006; 36(12):942-953. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2006.2336.
  24. Pashnameh A, Mirnasouri R, Nikravan M. Relationship between genu valgum, genu varum and flat food Deformities with Static and Dynamic Balance in Female Students of Dorud Islamic Azad University. Asian Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies. 2014; 2(2).
  25. Dabholkar A, Shah A, Yardi S. Comparison of dynamic balance between flat feet and normal individuals using star excursion balance test. Indian Journal of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy. 2012; 6(3):33-7.
  26. Mousavi SH, Ghasemi B, Faramarzi M. The Relationship Between Internal Leg Longitudinal Arch Rate with Static and Dynamic Balance in 12-14 Year Old School Boys. Sport Sciences and Health Research. 2010; 2:107-125. [In persian]
  27. Hertel J, Gay MR, Denegar CR. Differences in postural control during single-leg stance among healthy individuals with different foot types. J Athl Train. 2002; 37(2):129.
  28. Greve J, Alonso A, Bordini ACP, Camanho GL. Correlation between body mass index and postural balance. Clinics (Sao Paulo).2007; 62(6):717-20. doi: 10.1590/s1807-59322007000600010.
  29. Samaei A, Bakhtiary A, Elham F, Rezasoltani A. Effects of genu varum deformity on postural stability. Int J Sports Med. 2012; 33(6):469-73. doi: 10.1055/s-0031-1301331.
  30. Matsuda S, Demura S, Uchiyama M. Centre of pressure sway characteristics during static one-legged stance of athletes from different sports. J Sports Sci. 2008; 26(7):775-9. doi: 10.1080/02640410701824099.
  31. Lange B, Chipchase L, Evans A. The effect of low-Dye taping on plantar pressures, during gait, in subjects with navicular drop exceeding 10 mm. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004; 34(4):201-209. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2004.34.4.201.
  32. Walker M, Fan H-J. Relationship between foot pressure pattern and foot type. Foot Ankle Int. 1998; 19(6):379-383. doi: 10.1177/107110079801900607.
  33. Chougala A, Phanse V, Khanna E, Panda S. Screening of body mass index and functional flatfoot in adult: an observational study. Int J Physiother Res. 2015; 3(3):1037-41.
  34. García-Liñeira J, Leirós-Rodríguez R, Romo-Pérez V, García-Soidán JL. Static and dynamic postural control assessment in schoolchildren: Reliability and reference values of the Modified Flamingo Test and Bar Test. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2023; 36:14-19. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2023.05.006.
  35. Plisky P, Schwartkopf-Phifer K, Huebner B, Garner MB, Bullock G. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the Y-balance test lower quarter: reliability, discriminant validity, and predictive validity. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2021; 16(5):1190. doi: 10.26603/001c.27634.
  36. Plisky PJ, Gorman PP, Butler RJ, Kiesel KB, Underwood FB, Elkins B. The reliability of an instrumented device for measuring components of the star excursion balance test. N Am J Sports Phys Ther. 2009; 4(2):92.
  37. Kordi Ashkezari mh, Seidi F, Alizadeh MH. Effect of the Medial Longitudinal Arch Height of the Foot on Static and Dynamic Balance of Male Collegiate Athletes. The Scientific Journal of

 

        Rehabilitation Medicine. 2017; 6(2):1-10. doi:10.22037/jrm.2017.1100395.

  1. Han CZ, Subramaniam A, Zainudin FF, Vasanthi RK. Association between Medial Longitudinal Arch with Static and Dynamic Balance among Recreational Badminton Players. Physical Education Theory and Methodology. 2022; 22(3):346-52.
  2. Faghihi H, Nazari H. The effect of different degrees of sole flatness on static and dynamic balance of adolescent boys. Journal of Applied Exercise Physiology. 2016; 12(23):153-160. doi:10.22080/jaep.2016.1316.
  3. Ghasemi V, Rajabi R, Alizadeh M, Dashti Rostami K. The comparison of dynamic balance in males with different foot types. Journal of Exercise Science and Medicine. 2011; 3(1):5-20.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



 

 

 

 

 

The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery
Volume 12, Issue 12
December 2024
Pages 846-853

  • Receive Date 07 May 2024
  • Revise Date 25 August 2024
  • Accept Date 18 July 2024