Reliability between plantigraphy and line of Feiss in the assessment of the foot’s medial longitudinal arch

Abstract

Objective: To compare the reproducibility of results of assessment of the foot’s Medial Longitudinal Arch (MLA), obtained by Feiss line and plantigraphy. Methods: Twenty-six healthy volunteers of both sexes with mean age of 27.03±10.92 years were included; those with musculoskeletal disorders in their feet were excluded. Participants underwent assessments of just the right foot with plantigraphy and Feiss line by two different examiners, each of which used one of the methods to classify the deviation as normal, hollow or flat. Results were tabulated and compared. Results: Thirteen volunteers (50%) received the same classification by both of the assessment methods studied; the other 13 (50%) received different classifications. Conclusion: The plantigraphy and Feiss line assessment methods did not show sufficient repeated results to be considered reliable in classifying the foot’s MLA.