Reliability and validity of clinically assessing first-ray mobility of the foot

Mark W Cornwall, William D. Fishco, Thomas G. McPoil, Camilla Rae Lane, Deborah O'Donnell, Lea Hunt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The objective of the present study was to determine the amount of agreement among three clinicians in the clinical assessment of dorsal mobility of the foot's first ray and the agreement between their assessments and that of a mechanical device designed to quantify first-ray mobility. Sixty feet from 30 individuals evaluated clinically by three health-care professionals were classified as having a hypomobile, normal, or hypermobile first ray. The amount of first-ray dorsal mobility of each participant's foot was then measured using a device specifically constructed for that purpose. The results of this study show generally poor agreement among the three clinicians on whether a foot should be classified as having hypomobility, hypermobility, or normal mobility of the first ray. The amount of agreement with the quantitative device was poor for two of the clinicians and moderate for the third clinician.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)470-476
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of the American Podiatric Medical Association
Volume94
Issue number5
StatePublished - Sep 2004

Fingerprint

Reproducibility of Results
Foot
Equipment and Supplies
Delivery of Health Care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Cornwall, M. W., Fishco, W. D., McPoil, T. G., Lane, C. R., O'Donnell, D., & Hunt, L. (2004). Reliability and validity of clinically assessing first-ray mobility of the foot. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, 94(5), 470-476.

Reliability and validity of clinically assessing first-ray mobility of the foot. / Cornwall, Mark W; Fishco, William D.; McPoil, Thomas G.; Lane, Camilla Rae; O'Donnell, Deborah; Hunt, Lea.

In: Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, Vol. 94, No. 5, 09.2004, p. 470-476.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Cornwall, MW, Fishco, WD, McPoil, TG, Lane, CR, O'Donnell, D & Hunt, L 2004, 'Reliability and validity of clinically assessing first-ray mobility of the foot', Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association, vol. 94, no. 5, pp. 470-476.
Cornwall, Mark W ; Fishco, William D. ; McPoil, Thomas G. ; Lane, Camilla Rae ; O'Donnell, Deborah ; Hunt, Lea. / Reliability and validity of clinically assessing first-ray mobility of the foot. In: Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association. 2004 ; Vol. 94, No. 5. pp. 470-476.
@article{7d1e446c812c409ea1f6bb94518cbe50,
title = "Reliability and validity of clinically assessing first-ray mobility of the foot",
abstract = "The objective of the present study was to determine the amount of agreement among three clinicians in the clinical assessment of dorsal mobility of the foot's first ray and the agreement between their assessments and that of a mechanical device designed to quantify first-ray mobility. Sixty feet from 30 individuals evaluated clinically by three health-care professionals were classified as having a hypomobile, normal, or hypermobile first ray. The amount of first-ray dorsal mobility of each participant's foot was then measured using a device specifically constructed for that purpose. The results of this study show generally poor agreement among the three clinicians on whether a foot should be classified as having hypomobility, hypermobility, or normal mobility of the first ray. The amount of agreement with the quantitative device was poor for two of the clinicians and moderate for the third clinician.",
author = "Cornwall, {Mark W} and Fishco, {William D.} and McPoil, {Thomas G.} and Lane, {Camilla Rae} and Deborah O'Donnell and Lea Hunt",
year = "2004",
month = "9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "94",
pages = "470--476",
journal = "Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association",
issn = "8750-7315",
publisher = "American Podiatric Medical Association",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability and validity of clinically assessing first-ray mobility of the foot

AU - Cornwall, Mark W

AU - Fishco, William D.

AU - McPoil, Thomas G.

AU - Lane, Camilla Rae

AU - O'Donnell, Deborah

AU - Hunt, Lea

PY - 2004/9

Y1 - 2004/9

N2 - The objective of the present study was to determine the amount of agreement among three clinicians in the clinical assessment of dorsal mobility of the foot's first ray and the agreement between their assessments and that of a mechanical device designed to quantify first-ray mobility. Sixty feet from 30 individuals evaluated clinically by three health-care professionals were classified as having a hypomobile, normal, or hypermobile first ray. The amount of first-ray dorsal mobility of each participant's foot was then measured using a device specifically constructed for that purpose. The results of this study show generally poor agreement among the three clinicians on whether a foot should be classified as having hypomobility, hypermobility, or normal mobility of the first ray. The amount of agreement with the quantitative device was poor for two of the clinicians and moderate for the third clinician.

AB - The objective of the present study was to determine the amount of agreement among three clinicians in the clinical assessment of dorsal mobility of the foot's first ray and the agreement between their assessments and that of a mechanical device designed to quantify first-ray mobility. Sixty feet from 30 individuals evaluated clinically by three health-care professionals were classified as having a hypomobile, normal, or hypermobile first ray. The amount of first-ray dorsal mobility of each participant's foot was then measured using a device specifically constructed for that purpose. The results of this study show generally poor agreement among the three clinicians on whether a foot should be classified as having hypomobility, hypermobility, or normal mobility of the first ray. The amount of agreement with the quantitative device was poor for two of the clinicians and moderate for the third clinician.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4944226143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4944226143&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 15377723

AN - SCOPUS:4944226143

VL - 94

SP - 470

EP - 476

JO - Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association

JF - Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association

SN - 8750-7315

IS - 5

ER -