Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Jul 31;1(1):6.
doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-1-6.

Normative values for the Foot Posture Index

Anthony C Redmond  1 , Yvonne Z Crane, Hylton B Menz
Affiliations

Normative values for the Foot Posture Index

Anthony C Redmond et al. J Foot Ankle Res. .

Abstract

Background: The Foot Posture Index (FPI) is a validated method for quantifying standing foot posture, and is being used in a variety of clinical settings. There have however, been no normative data available to date for comparison and reference. This study aimed to establish normative FPI reference values.

Methods: Studies reporting FPI data were identified by searching online databases. Nine authors contributed anonymised versions of their original datasets comprising 1648 individual observations. The datasets included information relating to centre, age, gender, pathology (if relevant), FPI scores and body mass index (BMI) where available. FPI total scores were transformed to interval logit scores as per the Rasch model and normal ranges were defined. Comparisons between groups employed t-tests or ANOVA models as appropriate and data were explored descriptively and graphically.

Results: The main analysis based on a normal healthy population (n = 619) confirmed that a slightly pronated foot posture is the normal position at rest (mean back transformed FPI raw score = +4). A 'U' shaped relationship existed for age, with minors and older adults exhibiting significantly higher FPI scores than the general adult population (F = 51.07, p < 0.001). There was no difference between the FPI scores of males and females (2.3 versus 2.5; t = -1.44, p = 0.149). No relationship was found between the FPI and BMI. Systematic differences from the adult normals were confirmed in patients with neurogenic and idiopathic cavus (F = 216.981, p < 0.001), indicating some sensitivity of the instrument to detect a posturally pathological population.

Conclusion: A set of population norms for children, adults and older people have been derived from a large sample. Foot posture is related to age and the presence of pathology, but not influenced by gender or BMI. The normative values identified may assist in classifying foot type for the purpose of research and clinical decision making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Scatterplot of FPI scores according to age.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Histograms of FPI scores for minors, adults and older adults. Dashed lines represent means.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Boxplots of FPI scores according to presence of pathology. Error bars are 95% confidence intervals and horizontal lines represent medians.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Nigg BM, Cole GK, Nachbauer W. Effects of arch height of the foot on angular motion of the lower extremities in running. J Biomech. 1993;26:909–916. doi: 10.1016/0021-9290(93)90053-H. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nawoczenski DA, Saltzman CL, Cook TM. The effect of foot structure on the three-dimensional kinematic coupling behavior of the leg and rearfoot. Phys Ther. 1998;78:404–416. - PubMed
    1. Dahle LK, Mueller M, Delitto A, Diamond JE. Visual assessment of foot type and relationship of foot type to lower extremity injury. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1991;14:70–74. - PubMed
    1. Cowan DN, Jones BH, Robinson JR. Foot morphologic characteristics and risk of exercise-related injury. Arch Fam Med. 1993;2:773–777. doi: 10.1001/archfami.2.7.773. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Razeghi M, Batt ME. Foot type classification: a critical review of current methods. Gait Posture. 2002;15:282–291. doi: 10.1016/S0966-6362(01)00151-5. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources