ÁßÀç¹æ¹ý¿¡ µû¸¥ ¾öÁö¹ß°¡¶ô °¡ÂÊÈÚÁõ ȯÀÚÀÇ ¹ß¹Ù´Ú ¾Ð·ÂºÐÆ÷¿¡ ¹ÌÄ¡´Â ¿µÇâ
The Effect of Intervention on Hallux Valgus Patient¡¯s Foot Pressure

´ëÇÑÅëÇÕÀÇÇÐȸÁö 2015³â 3±Ç 2È£ p.63 ~ p.72

±èÈ£¼º(Kim Ho-Sung) - À»Áö´ëÇб³ ¹°¸®Ä¡·áÇаú
±è¸íö(Kim Myung-Chul) - À»Áö´ëÇб³ ¹°¸®Ä¡·áÇаú
À̹μö(Lee Min-Soo) - À»Áö´ëÇб³ ¹°¸®Ä¡·áÇаú

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the foot pressure of subjects with hallux valgus following conservative management.

Methods: The subjects (20 females) were divided into 2 groups; Hallux valgus group (10) and Control group (10) who could evaluate questionnaire & weight bearing X-ray. All the participants were evaluated distribution of foot pressure by Zebris FDM-S system with conservative management (taping therapy and hallux valgus device) during single-limb stance.

Results: The Hallux valgus group (HVG) was significantly different than Control group (CG) in hallux valgus angle(p<0.05). The Hallux valgus group with Foot Device (HVG-FD), Hallux valgus group with Taping (HVG-Tp) and Hallux valgus group with Foot device and Taping (HVG-FD&Tp) was not significantly different than CG in hallux valgus angle (p<0.05). The HVG was not significantly different than CG in forefoot (p1, p2, p3), significantly different than CG in rearfoot (p7) about foot pressure during single-limb stance (p<0.05). The HVG-FO and HVG-FO and TP was significantly different than HVG in forefoot (p1, p2, p3), on significantly different than HVG in rearfoot (p7) about foot pressure during single-limb stance (p<0.05). There was significantly correlation HVG-FO and HVG-FO & TP in forefoot (p1, p2, p3) was negative correlation (p<0.05) and in rearfoot (p7) was positive correlation (p<0.05).

Conclusion: This study showed that hallux valgus were effected hallux valgus angle and foot pressure by various treatment methods during single-limb stance. Further study is needed to measure various age and work with hallux valgus for clinical application.

Å°¿öµå

foot pressure, hallux valgus, hallux valgus device, hallux valgus tapping
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
ÇмúÁøÈïÀç´Ü(KCI) 
ÁÖÁ¦ÄÚµå
ÁÖÁ¦¸í(Target field)
¿¬±¸´ë»ó(Population)
¿¬±¸Âü¿©(Sample size)
´ë»ó¼ºº°(Gender)
Áúº´Æ¯¼º(Condition Category)
¿¬±¸È¯°æ(Setting)
¿¬±¸¼³°è(Study Design)
¿¬±¸±â°£(Period)
ÁßÀç¹æ¹ý(Intervention Type)
ÁßÀç¸íĪ(Intervention Name)
Å°¿öµå(Keyword)
À¯È¿¼º°á°ú(Recomendation)
The Hallux valgus group with Foot Device (HVG-FD), Hallux valgus group with Taping (HVG-Tp) and Hallux valgus group with Foot device and Taping (HVG-FD&Tp) was not significantly different than CG in hallux valgus angle (p<0.05).
¿¬±¸ºñÁö¿ø(Fund Source)
±Ù°Å¼öÁØÆò°¡(Evidence Hierarchy)
ÃâÆdz⵵(Year)
Âü¿©ÀúÀÚ¼ö(Authors)
´ëÇ¥ÀúÀÚ
DOI
KCDÄÚµå
ICD 03
°Ç°­º¸ÇèÄÚµå