Downloads: 1
India | Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation | Volume 14 Issue 7, July 2025 | Pages: 1207 - 1213
To Evaluate the Reliability, Validity, and Accuracy of the Footwork Pro System in Measuring Static Plantar Pressure Distribution
Abstract: Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability, validity, and accuracy of the Footwork Pro system in the measurement of static plantar pressure in healthy adults. Methods: We performed a reliability study using a test-retest design. The sample consisted of 132 healthy adults of both sexes, aged 20 to 40. Participants were assessed by three trained investigators. Measurements for the static plantar pressure were performed. We used the Descriptive statistics, ANOVA test, Pairwise Comparisons (Tukey's Method), Practical implications to estimate reliability, validity and accuracy of the footwork pro system. Results: Measurements across static conditions were consistent between sessions, with CCC values exceeding 0.90 and minimal biases. No significant differences were found in the test-retest evaluations. The study demonstrates high reliability and consistency in plantar pressure measurements across different researchers for various foot regions. Conclusion: The Footwork Pro system demonstrates clinically acceptable reliability, validity, and accuracy for static plantar pressure measurements, supporting its application in research and clinical environments.
Keywords: Foot analysis, Plantar pressure distribution, Static plantar pressure, Footwork Pro System, Baropodometry, Mid-foot, Hind-foot, ANOVA, Tukey?s Method, High reliability and reproducibility, Overall reliability, Non-specific Low Back Pain
How to Cite?: Dr. Satish Kumar, Dr. Maneesh Arora, Dr. Dharam P. Pandey, "To Evaluate the Reliability, Validity, and Accuracy of the Footwork Pro System in Measuring Static Plantar Pressure Distribution", Volume 14 Issue 7, July 2025, International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR), Pages: 1207-1213, https://www.ijsr.net/getabstract.php?paperid=SR25717162611, DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21275/SR25717162611
Received Comments
No approved comments available.