Volume 3, Issue 1 (2018)                   IQBQ 2018, 3(1): 13-17 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Malekabadizadeh‎ Z, Barati ‎ A, Madadi‎ F. Comparison of Navicular Drop and Hallux Deviation in Women ‎with Different Knee Osteoarthritis Radiographic Grades. IQBQ. 2018; 3 (1) :13-17
URL: http://journals.modares.ac.ir/article-32-15802-en.html
1- Occupational Health Engineering Department, Health Faculty, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran‎ , z.malekabadi.ot@gmail.com
2- Occupational Health Engineering Department, Health Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran ‎
3- Occupational Health Engineering Department, Health Faculty, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical ‎Sciences, Tehran, Iran ‎
Abstract:   (1027 Views)
Aims: Knee osteoarthritis is the most common joint disease. It has more prevalence and severity in women than in men. The aim of this research was to compare the navicular drop (ND) and hallux deviation (HD) in women with different knee osteoarthritis (OA) based on the radiographic grades of 1 to 4.   
Instruments and Methods: The present research was a descriptive cross-sectional and causal-comparative study. The study population included women with knee osteoarthritis in Tehran. The statistical sample included 87 female patients with knee osteoarthritis, who were selected based on the simple purposive and non-probability sampling method from patients referring to specialized clinics and Akhtar Hospital in 2015. The number of knees with knee OA was 168, which were divided into 4 groups based on the Kellgren-Lawrence grading scale. One-way analysis of variance was used to compare the difference between the groups in terms of the amount of navicular drop and the hallux deviation, and for significant results, Tukey's post hoc test was applied.
Findings: There was a significant difference between the first and second groups regarding the extent of ND, which was mostly observed in Group 2. It was non-significantly higher in Group 4 in comparison with Group 3 and higher in Group 3 than in Group 1. The mean of HD increased from Group 1 to 4 but not significantly.
Conclusion: Higher drop in navicular is a risk factor for the development of knee osteoarthritis radiographic grades.
Full-Text [PDF 461 kb]   (222 Downloads)    

Received: 2017/11/27 | Accepted: 2018/05/29 | Published: 2018/05/29

1. Goldman L, Ausiello D. Cecil medicine. 23rd Edition. Philadelphia: Saunders Elsevier; 2008.‎ [Link]
2. Banaee M. Arthritis and principles of rehabilitation. 2nd Edition. Mashhad: Ferdowsi University Press; ‎‎1991. pp. 2-30. [Persian]‎ [Link]
3. Lanes SF, Lanza LL, Radensky PW, Yood RA, Meenan RF, Walker AM, et al. Resource utilization and cost of ‎care for rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis in a managed care setting: The importance of drug and ‎surgery costs. Arthritis Rheum. 1997;40(8):1475-81.‎ [Link]
4. Brouwer GM, van Tol AW, Bergink AP, Belo JN, Bernsen RMD, Reijman M, et al. Association between valgus ‎and varus alignment and the development and progression of radiographic osteoarthritis of the knee. ‎Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56(4):1204-11.‎ [Link]
5. Dieppe P. The classification and diagnosis of osteoarthritis. In: Kuettner KE, Goldberg VM, editors. ‎Osteoarthritic disorders: Workshop, Monterey, California. Evanston: The Academy; 1995.‎ [Link]
6. Kouhnavard B, Zolfaghari A. Determine the prevalence and risk of occupational-skeletal disorders in ‎employees of an industrial unit. J Preventive Med. 2016;3(1):10-7. [Persian]‎ [Link]
7. Pelletier JM, Lajeunesse D, Pelletier JP. Etiopathogenesis of osteoarthritis. In: Koopman WJ, editors. ‎Arthritis and allied conditions: A textbook of rheumatology. Baltimore: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2005.‎ [Link]
8. Tetsworth K, Paley D. Malalignment and degenerative arthropathy. Orthop Clin North Am. ‎‎1994;25(3):367-77. ‎ [Link]
9. Hunter DJ, Sharma L, Skaife T. Alignment and osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am. ‎‎2009;91(Suppl 1):85-9.‎ [Link] [DOI:10.2106/JBJS.H.01409]
10. Choobineh A, Tabatabaei SH, Mokhtarzadeh A, Salehi M. Musculoskeletal problems among workers of an ‎iranian rubber factory. J Occup Health. 2007;49(5):418-23. ‎ [Link] [DOI:10.1539/joh.49.418]
11. Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1957;16(4):494-‎‎502.‎ [Link]
12. Amini Aghdam S, daneshmandi H. The comparison of navicular drop and back knee angle in athletes ‎with and without a history of anterior cruciate ligament injury. Sport Med Stud. 2011;2(8):49-60. [Persian]‎ [Link]
13. Etemadinezhad S, Ranjbar F, Gorji M. Posture analysis by OWAS method and prevalence of ‎musculoskeletal disorders using Nordic Questionnaire among workers of Sourak Tobacco Factory in 2013. ‎Iran J Health Sci. 2013;1(2):89-94. ‎ [Link] [DOI:10.18869/acadpub.jhs.1.2.89]
14. Levinger P, Menz HB, Fotoohabadi MR, Feller JA, Bartlett JR, Bergman NR. Foot posture in people with ‎medial compartment knee osteoarthritis. J Foot Ankle Res. 2010;3:29.‎ [Link] [DOI:10.1186/1757-1146-3-29]
15. Avani J, Ajit D, Sujata YA. comparative study of ankle and foot characteristics in knee osteoarthritis ‎patients and normals. Ind J Physiother Occup Ther. 2012;6(4):1-6.‎ [Link]
16. Davis MA, Ettinger WH, Neuhaus JM, Hauck WW. Sex differences in osteoarthritis of the knee, The role of ‎obesity. Am J Epidemiol. 1988;127(5):1019-30.‎ [Link]
17. Schwellnus M. Practical clinical lower limb biomechanical assessment in athletes. Int J Sports Med. ‎‎2001;2(6).‎ [Link]
18. Mueller MJ, Host JV, Norton BJ. Navicular drop as a composite measure of excessive pronation. J Am ‎Podiatr Med Assoc. 1993;83(4):198-202. ‎ [Link]
19. Karen PC, 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):41-6.‎ [Link]
20. Magee DJ. Orthopedic physical assessment. 2th Edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders; 1992.‎ [Link]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author