Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2020

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Electromyographic | Research article

An exploratory study investigating the effect of foot type and foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity

Authors: Sean Sadler, Martin Spink, Xanne Janse de Jonge, Vivienne Chuter

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Abnormal gluteus medius muscle activity is associated with a number of musculoskeletal conditions. Research investigating the effect of foot type and foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity is both conflicting and limited. The primary aim was to investigate the relationship between foot type and gluteus medius muscle activity during shod walking. The secondary aims of this study were to explore the effect and amount of usage of a pair of unmodified prefabricated foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity during shod walking.

Methods

Foot type was determined using the foot posture index and gluteus medius muscle activity was measured with surface electromyography in 50 healthy adults during shod walking. Participants were then fitted with prefabricated foot orthoses and required to return after 4 weeks. Pearson’s correlation and one-way ANOVA were used to determine effect of foot type. Paired t-tests and ANCOVA were used to determine effect of foot orthoses.

Results

Participants with a cavus foot type demonstrated significantly more gluteus medius mean (p = 0.04) and peak amplitude (p = 0.01), and a greater range in amplitude (p = 0.01) compared to participants with a neutral foot type. Compared to a planus foot type, participants with a cavus foot type demonstrated significantly larger mean (p = 0.02) and peak amplitude (p = 0.01), and a greater range in amplitude (p = 0.01). Prefabricated foot orthoses did not change the gluteus medius muscle activity.

Conclusion

When assessing healthy adults with a cavus foot type, clinicians and researchers should be aware that these participants may display higher levels of gluteus medius muscle activity during gait compared to neutral and planus type feet. Additionally, clinicians and researchers should be aware that the type of prefabricated foot orthoses used did not change gluteus medius muscle activity over 4 weeks. Future research should aim to explore this relationship between foot type and gluteus medius muscle activity in larger sample sizes, consider the potential role of other lower extremity muscles and biomechanical variables, and investigate if these findings also occur in people with pathology.
Literature
1.
Reiman MP, Bolgla LA, Loudon JK. A literature review of studies evaluating gluteus maximus and gluteus medius activation during rehabilitation exercises. Physiother Theory Pract. 2012;28(4):257–68.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Lee D. An approach to examinations and treatment of lumbo-pelvic-hip region., 2nd edn. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1999.
3.
Chuter VH, Janse de Jonge XAK. Proximal and distal contributions to lower extremity injury: a review of the literature. Gait Posture. 2012;36(1):7–15.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Levinger P, Gilleard W. Tibia and rearfoot motion and ground reaction forces in subjects with patellofemoral pain syndrome during walking. Gait Posture. 2007;25(1):2–8.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Farahpour N, Jafarnezhadgero A, Allard P, Majlesi M. Muscle activity and kinetics of lower limbs during walking in pronated feet individuals with and without low back pain. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2018;39:35–41.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Trendelenburg F. Trendelenburg’s test: 1895. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;(355):3–7.
7.
Kendall JC, Bird AR, Azari MF. Foot posture, leg length discrepancy and low back pain – their relationship and clinical management using foot orthoses – an overview. Foot. 2014;24(2):75–80.CrossRefPubMed
8.
O'Leary CB, Cahill CR, Robinson AW, Barnes MJ, Hong J. A systematic review: the effects of podiatrical deviations on nonspecific chronic low back pain. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2013;26(2):117–23.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Barwick A, Smith J, Chuter V. The relationship between foot motion and lumbopelvic-hip function: a review of the literature. Foot (Edinburgh, Scotland). 2012;22(3):224–31.
10.
Snyder KR, Earl JE, O'Connor KM, Ebersole KT. Resistance training is accompanied by increases in hip strength and changes in lower extremity biomechanics during running. Clin Biomech. 2009;24(1):26–34.CrossRef
11.
Murley GS, Landorf KB, Menz HB, Bird AR. Effect of foot posture, foot orthoses and footwear on lower limb muscle activity during walking and running: a systematic review. Gait Posture. 2009;29(2):172–87.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Bird AR, Bendrups AP, Payne CB. The effect of foot wedging on electromyographic activity in the erector spinae and gluteus medius muscles during walking. Gait Posture. 2003;18(2):81–91.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Krause DA, Jacobs RS, Pilger KE, Sather BR, Sibunka SP, Hollman JH. Electromyographic analysis of the gluteus Medius in five weight-bearing exercises. J Strength Cond Res. 2009;23(9):2689–94.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Khodaveisi H, Sadeghi H, Memar R, Anbarian M. Comparison of selected muscular activity of trunk and lower extremities in young women’s walking on supinated, pronated and normal foot. Apunts Medicina de l'Esport. 2016;51(189):13–9.CrossRef
15.
Lack S, Barton C, Vicenzino B, Morrissey D. Outcome predictors for conservative Patellofemoral pain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2014;44(12):1703–16.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Mills K, Blanch P, Chapman AR, McPoil TG, Vicenzino B. Foot orthoses and gait: a systematic review and meta-analysis of literature pertaining to potential mechanisms. Br J Sports Med. 2010;44(14):1035–46.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Desmyttere G, Hajizadeh M, Bleau J, Begon M. Effect of foot orthosis design on lower limb joint kinematics and kinetics during walking in flexible pes planovalgus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Biomech. 2018;59:117–29.CrossRef
18.
Razeghi M, Batt ME. Biomechanical analysis of the effect of orthotic shoe inserts: a review of the literature. Sports Med (Auckland, NZ). 2000;29(6):425–38.CrossRef
19.
Landorf K, Keenan A. Efficacy of foot orthoses. What does the literature tell us? J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2000;90(3):149–58.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Moisan G, Cantin V. Effects of two types of foot orthoses on lower limb muscle activity before and after a one-month period of wear. Gait Posture. 2016;46:75–80.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Nigg BM. The role of impact forces and foot pronation: a new paradigm. Clin J Sport Med. 2001;11(1):2–9.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Lack S, Barton C, Malliaras P, Twycross-Lewis R, Woledge R, Morrissey D. The effect of anti-pronation foot orthoses on hip and knee kinematics and muscle activity during a functional step-up task in healthy individuals: a laboratory study. Clin Biomech. 2014;29(2):177–82.CrossRef
23.
Moisan G, Descarreaux M, Cantin V. Muscle activation during fast walking with two types of foot orthoses in participants with cavus feet. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2018;43:7–13.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Hertel J, Sloss BR, Earl JE. Effect of foot orthotics on quadriceps and gluteus medius electromyographic activity during selected exercises. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(1):26–30.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Lack S, Barton C, Woledge R, Laupheimer M, Morrissey D. The immediate effects of foot orthoses on hip and knee kinematics and muscle activity during a functional step-up task in individuals with patellofemoral pain. Clin Biomech. 2014;29(9):1056–62.CrossRef
26.
Hagstromer M, Oja P, Sjostrom M. The international physical activity questionnaire (IPAQ): a study of concurrent and construct validity. Public Health Nutr. 2006;9(6):755–62.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Menz HB. Two feet, or one person? Problems associated with statistical analysis of paired data in foot and ankle medicine. Foot. 2004;14(1):2–5.CrossRef
28.
29.
Teyhen DS, Stoltenberg BE, Eckard TG, Doyle PM, Boland DM, Feldtmann JJ, McPoil TG, Christie DS, Molloy JM, Goffar SL. Static foot posture associated with dynamic plantar pressure parameters. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011;41(2):100–7.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Keenan A-M, Redmond AC, Horton M, Conaghan PG, Tennant A. The foot posture index: Rasch analysis of a novel, foot-specific outcome measure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;88(1):88–93.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Cornwall MW, McPoil TG, Lebec M, Vicenzino B, Wilson J. Reliability of the modified foot posture index. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2008;98(1):7–13.PubMedCrossRef
32.
Hermens HJ, Freriks B, Disselhorst-Klug C, Rau G. Development of recommendations for SEMG sensors and sensor placement procedures. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2000;10(5):361–74.PubMedCrossRef
33.
Boren K, Conrey C, Le Coguic J, Paprocki L, Voight M, Robinson TK. Electromyographic analysis of gluteus medius and gluteus maximus during rehabilitation exercises. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2011;6(3):206–23.PubMedPubMedCentral
34.
Bussey MD, Aldabe D, Adhia D, Mani R. Reliability of surface electromyography activity of gluteal and hamstring muscles during sub-maximal and maximal voluntary isometric contractions. Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2018;34:103–7.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Wall-Scheffler CM, Chumanov E, Steudel-Numbers K, Heiderscheit B. Electromyography activity across gait and incline: the impact of muscular activity on human morphology. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2010;143(4):601–11.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
36.
Kelly LA, Girard O, Racinais S. Effect of orthoses on changes in neuromuscular control and aerobic cost of a 1-h run. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2011;43(12):2335–43.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Murley GS, Landorf KB, Menz HB. Do foot orthoses change lower limb muscle activity in flat-arched feet towards a pattern observed in normal-arched feet? Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2010;25(7):728–36.CrossRef
38.
Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, Altman DG, Barbour V, Macdonald H, Johnston M, et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ (Clin Res ed). 2014;348:g1687.
39.
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 2nd edn. L. Erlbaum Associates: Hillsdale; 1988.
40.
Williams DS, Davis IM, Scholz JP, Hamill J, Buchanan TS. High-arched runners exhibit increased leg stiffness compared to low-arched runners. Gait Posture. 2004;19(3):263–9.PubMedCrossRef
41.
Williams DS 3rd, Tierney RN, Butler RJ. Increased medial longitudinal arch mobility, lower extremity kinematics, and ground reaction forces in high-arched runners. J Athl Train. 2014;49(3):290–6.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
42.
Sadler S, Cassidy S, Peterson B, Spink M, Chuter V. Gluteus medius muscle function in people with and without low back pain: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019;20(1):463.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
43.
Barton CJ, Levinger P, Crossley KM, Webster KE, Menz HB. Relationships between the foot posture index and foot kinematics during gait in individuals with and without patellofemoral pain syndrome. J Foot Ankle Res. 2011;4(1):10.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
44.
45.
Hollander K, Zech A, Rahlf AL, Orendurff MS, Stebbins J, Heidt C. The relationship between static and dynamic foot posture and running biomechanics: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gait Posture. 2019;72:109–22.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
An exploratory study investigating the effect of foot type and foot orthoses on gluteus medius muscle activity
Authors
Sean Sadler
Martin Spink
Xanne Janse de Jonge
Vivienne Chuter
Publication date
01-12-2020
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03683-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2020 Go to the issue

Research article

Digital anatomical study and clinical application of screw placement for quadrilateral plate fractures in the danger zone

Case report

No functional differences in anatomic reconstruction with one vs. two suture anchors after non-simultaneous bilateral distal biceps brachii tendon rupture: a case report and review of the literature

Research article

Predicting developmental dysplasia of the hip in at-risk newborns

Research article

Periodic injections of adipose-derived stem cell sheets attenuate osteoarthritis progression in an experimental rabbit model

Research article

Which anatomic structures are responsible for the reduction loss after hybrid stabilization of osteoporotic fractures of the thoracolumbar spine?

Research article

Objective evaluation of postoperative changes in real-life activity levels in the postoperative course of lumbar spinal surgery using wearable trackers