The degree of valgus in the heel during weightbearing (the rearfoot angle) is commonly used as an angular criterion in the evaluation and treatment of flatfoot in children and adults. The rearfoot angle has been frequently reported to reduce with age to a vertical heel position attained at approximately 7 years old. The present study evaluated the rearfoot angle in 150 healthy children (age range, 6-16 years). The average rearfoot angle for all children in this study was 4° of valgus (SD, 1.1° range, 0°-9° of valgus). There was no significant difference in the rearfoot angle in children of different ages. The rearfoot angle did not reduce to the vertical heel position by age 7 as had been reported previously.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons: Joint Motion: Method of Measuring and Recording, Chicago, AAOS, 1965.
2.
AndersonA.F., and FowlerS.B.: Anterior calcaneal osteotomy for symptomatic juvenile pes planus. Foot Ankle,4:274–283, 1984.
3.
AstromM., and ArvidsonT.: Alignment and joint motion in the normal foot. J. Orthop. Sports Phys. Ther,22:216–222, 1995.
4.
BanksA.S., and SmithT.F.: Operative treatment of the non-neurogenic pes valgus foot, InDeValentineS. (ed.), Foot and Ankle Disorders in Children. New York, Churchill Livingstone, 1992, pp. 329–367.
5.
BeckE.L., and McGlamryE.D.: Modified young tendosus-pension technique for flexible fiatfoot. J. Am. Podiatr. Assoc,63:582–604, 1973.
6.
CaillietR.: Foot and Ankle Pain, 2nd Ed.Philadelphia, F.A. Davis, 1985, p. 10.
7.
DiamondJ.E., MuellerM.J., DelittoA., and SinacoreD.R.: Reliability of a diabetic foot evaluation. Phys. Ther.,69:797–802, 1989.
8.
DockeryG.L.: Surgical treatment of the symptomatic juvenile flexible fiatfoot condition. Clin. Podiatr. Med. Surg.,4:99–117, 1987.
9.
ElveruR.A., RothsteinJ.M., and LambR.R.: Goniometrie reliability in a clinical setting: subtalar and ankle joint measurements. Phys. Ther.,68:672–677, 1988.
10.
FieldsK.B., and CraibM.: Biomechanics of running. InSallisR.E., MassiminoF. (eds.), Essentials of Sports Medicine. St. Louis, Mosby, 1997.
11.
FreemanA.C.: A study of the inter-tester and intra-tester reliability in the measurement of resting calcaneal stance position and neutral calcaneal stance position. Aust. Podiatrist,24:10–13, 1990.
12.
HauserE.D.: Diseases of the Foot. Philadelphia, W.B. Saun-ders, 1941, p. 34.
13.
. JayFt., SchoenhausH.D., SeymourC, and GambleS.: The dynamic stabilizing innersole system (DSIS): the management of hyperpronation in children. J. Foot Ankle Surg., 34: 1124–131, 1995.
14.
LaheyM.A., DowneyR.G., and SaalP.E.: Intraclass correlations: there's more there than meets the eye. Psychol. Bull.,93:586–595, 1983.
15.
LatimerB., and LovejoyCO.: The calcaneus of Australopithecus afarensis and its implications for the evolution of bipedality. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol., 78:369–386, 1989.
16.
LeLievreJ.: Current concepts and correction in the valgus foot. Clin. Orthop.,70:43–55, 1970.
17.
LundeenR.O.: The Smith STA-peg operation for hypermobile pes planovalgus in children. J. Am. Podiatr. Med. Assoc,4:177–183, 1985.
18.
MacAuslandW.R., and MayoR.: Orthopedics: A Concise Guide to Clinical Practice. Boston, Little, Brown, 1964, pp. 269–270.
19.
MahanK.T.: Pes planovalgus deformity. InMcGlamryE.D. (ed.), Surgery of the Foot and Ankle, 2nd Ed.Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins, 1992, pp. 769–817.
20.
MarksR.M., and SchonL.C.: Posttraumatic posterior tibialis tendon insertional elongation with functional incompetency: a case report. Foot Ankle Int.,19:180–183, 1998.
21.
McCreaJ.D.: Pediatric Orthopedics of the Lower Extremity. Mount Kisco, New York, Futura Publishing, 1985, p. 187.
22.
McPoilT.G., and CornwallM.W.: Relationship between neutral subtalar joint position and pattern of rearfoot motion during walking. Foot Ankle Int.,15:141–145, 1994.
23.
McPoilT.G., and CornwallM.W.: Relationship between three static angles of the rearfoot and the pattern of rearfoot motion during walking. J. Orthop. Sport Phys. Ther.,23:370–375, 1996.
24.
MenzH.B.: Clinical hindfoot measurement: a critical review of the literature. The Foot,5:57–64, 1995.
25.
MenzH.B., and KeenanA.M.: Reliability of two instruments in the measurement of closed chain subtalar joint positions. The Foot,7:194–201, 1997.
26.
MortonD.J.: Physiological considerations in the treatment of foot deformities. J. Bone Joint Surg.,19:1052–1056, 1937.
27.
NiggB.M.: Biomechanics as applied to sport. InHarriesM., WilliamsC, StanishW.D., and MicheliL. (eds.), The Oxford Textbook of Sports Medicine. New York, Oxford University Press, 1994, pp. 94–111.
28.
RomeK.L., and CowiesonF.: A reliability study of the universal goniometer, fluid goniometer, and electrogoniometer for the measurement of ankle dorsiflexion. Foot Ankle Int.,17:28–32, 1996.
29.
RootM.L., OrienW.P., WeedJ.H., and HughesR.J.: Biomechanical Examination of the Foot. Los Angeles, Clinical Biomechanics, 1971, p. 131.
30.
RootM.L., OrienW.P., WeedJ.H., and HughesR.J.: Normal and abnormal Function of the Foot. Los Angeles, Clinical Biomechanics, 1977.
31.
RosnerB: Fundamentals of Biostatistics. Belmont, CA, Duxbury Press, 1995, pp. 517–521.
32.
SarrafianS.K.: Biomechanics of the subtalar joint complex. Clin. Orthop.,290:17–26, 1993.
33.
SchusterR.O.: Children's foot survey Harpursville Central School. J. Podiatry,17:13–21, 1956.
34.
SeltzerS.E., WeissmanB.N., BraunsteinE.M., AdamsD.F., and ThomasW.H.: Computed tomography of the hind-foot. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr.,8:488–497, 1984.
35.
SimsD.S., and CavanaghP.R.: Selected foot mechanics related to the prescription of foot orthoses. InJahssM.H. (ed.), Disorders of the Foot and Ankle: Medical and Surgical Management, 2nd Ed.Philadelphia, W.B. Saunders, 1991, pp. 469–483.
36.
SmithS.D., and MillarE.A.: Arthrorisis by means of a subtalar polyethylene peg implant for correction of hindfoot pronation in children. Clin. Orthop.,181:15–23, 1983.
37.
SmithS.D., and WagreichC.R.: Review of postoperative results of the subtalar arthrorisis operation: a preliminary study. J. Foot Ankle Surg.,23:253–260, 1984.
38.
SpinnerS.M., ChussidF., and LongD.H.: Criteria for combined procedure selection in the surgical correction of the acquired flatfoot. Clin. Podiatr. Med. Surg.,6:561–575, 1989.
39.
StaheliL.T.: Fundamentals of Pediatric Orthopedics. New York, Raven Press, 1992, p. 5.14.
40.
SubotnickS.I.: The subtalar joint lateral extra-articular arthroereisis: a preliminary report. J. Am. Podiatr. Assoc,64:701–711, 1974.
41.
ThorndikeR.M.: Measurement and Evaluation in Psychology and Education. Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1997, pp. 95–128.
42.
ValmassyR.L.: Lower extremity treatment modalities for the pediatric patient. InValmassyR.L. (ed.), Clinical Biomechanics of the Lower Extremities. New York, C.V. Mosby, 1996, pp. 426–452.
43.
VitasaloJ.T., and KvistM.O.: Some biomechanical aspects of the foot and ankle in athletes with an without shin splints. Am. J. Sport Med.,11:125–130, 1983.
44.
Weiner OgilvieS., RendallG.C., and AbboudR.J.: Reliability of open kinetic chain subtalar joint measurement. The Foot,7:128–134, 1997.
45.
WengerD.R.: Flatfoot and Children's Shoes. InWengerD.R., and RangM. (eds.), The Art and Practice of Children's Orthopaedics. New York, Raven Press, 1993, pp. 77–102.
46.
WrightD.G., DesaiM.E., and HendersonW.H.: Action of the subtalar and ankle-joint complex during the stance phase of walking. J. Bone Joint Surg.,46A:361–382, 1964.
47.
YuG.V., and BobergJ.: Subtalar arthroereisis. InMcGlamryE.D. (ed.), Surgery of the Foot and Ankle, 2nd Ed.Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins, 1992, pp. 818–828.
