CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05656014Updated Aug 12, 2024

The Relationship of the Medial Longitudinal Arch Height With Clinical Features of Knee Osteoarthritis

An observational study in Foot Deformities, Pes Planus and Pes Cavus, sponsored by Gazi University. Completed at 1 site in Turkey. Open to participants aged 50 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-08-12.

Sponsored by Gazi University · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrollment
90
Ages
50 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The goal of this observational study is to investigate the relationships between the medial longitudinal arch (MLA) height of the foot and clinical and radiological characteristics of knee osteoarthritis in adult patients 50 aged and over. The main questions it aims to answer are:

  • Is there any relationship between knee pain and disability in knee osteoarthritis and MLA height?
  • Is there any relationship between the radiologic severity of knee osteoarthritis and MLA height?
  • Is there any relationship between knee joint alignment in knee osteoarthritis and MLA height?
Read the detailed description

Differences in hind and midfoot structures, including the medial longitudinal arch, affect lower limb alignment and biomechanics. However, the causal relationship between knee joint problems and foot deformities is controversial. Knee osteoarthritis, a common orthopaedic condition in the elderly population, tends to distort the lower limb alignment by narrowing the tibiofemoral joint space asymmetrically. Therefore, knee varus and medial longitudinal arch deformities may change gait biomechanics on knee osteoarthritis. However, there is insufficient evidence on the relationship between variation in foot posture and disease severity, knee varus deformity, knee pain and disability in knee osteoarthritis. In this study, investigators will examine the lower extremity alignment and osteoarthritis severity in terms of MLA height in adults with knee osteoarthritis.

The study sample will be formed by the simple random sampling method from adult patients with knee osteoarthritis who will be admitted to our clinics and outpatient clinics with knee pain. It was planned to include 93 participants to be able to detect the two-way correlation between the knee WOMAC score and the arch height index with an effect size of 0.3, a power of 90%, and a 5% margin of error.

Initially, demographic data, including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), limb dominance, and time from knee pain onset of participants, will be recorded. For both knees goniometric measurement of knee passive range of motion (ROM), visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) will be applied. Kellgren/Lawrence stages, mechanical, and anatomical tibiofemoral angles for knee joints will be obtained from lower limb length X-ray. MLA height index measurement will be performed by an investigator blinded to the patient's clinical condition. According to the results of descriptive statistics, the relationship between MLA height measurement results (arch height index and arch height flexibility) and Kellgren-Lawrence stage, VAS, WOMAC and tibiofemoral angles will be examined by correlation analysis. In case of significant correlation, regression analyses for Kellgren-Lawrence, VAS and WOMAC scores as dependent variables will be applied.

02

Conditions studied

  • Foot Deformities
  • Pes Planus
  • Pes Cavus
  • Knee Osteoarthritis
  • Knee Pain Chronic
  • Disability Physical
  • Lower Limb Deformity

Keywords

  • Medial longitudinal arch
  • Arch height index
  • Knee osteoarthritis
  • Knee pain
  • Foot
  • Lower limb alignment
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
50 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

Adult patients 50 years of age or older diagnosed with osteoarthritis of one or both knees according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria

Inclusion criteria

  • Being 50 years old or older
  • Having a diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis according to the American College of Rheumatology

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • History of fracture or orthopaedic surgery involving lower limbs
  • Presence of neurological condition resulting in lower limb sensorimotor deficit
  • Having another inflammatory rheumatological disease
  • Having a malignant tumour with bone metastasis
  • Having lower limb oedema, lymphedema, skin and soft tissue loss that will prevent the evaluation of foot morphology (arch height index)
  • Severe neuropsychiatric disease or condition that interferes with communication
  • Having therapeutic injection into the knee joint in the last 3 months
  • Presence of any major trauma that aggravated knee pain in the last 6 weeks
04

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Cross-sectional
Enrollment
90 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Patients with knee osteoarthritis

    Adult patients 50 years of age or older diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis according to American College of Rheumatology criteria

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Arch Height Index while bipedal standing

    The ratio of the dorsum height of the foot (measured in the middle of the total foot length) to truncated foot length, while bipedal standing. Normal values have been reported to be approximately 0.338 ± 0.031 to 0.343 ± 0.033 in college-aged women. Higher values represent the increased medial longitudinal arch height of the foot (e.g. pes cavus) while lower values are related to pes planus.

    Time frame: Within the three days of clinical evaluation

  2. Arch Height Index while sitting

    The ratio of the dorsum height of the foot (measured in the middle of the total foot length) to truncated foot length, while sitting with feet calmly on the ground. Normal values have been reported to be approximately 0.355 ± 0.031 to 0.369 ± 0.034 in college-aged women. Higher values represent the increased medial longitudinal arch height of the foot (e.g. pes cavus) while lower values are related to pes planus.

    Time frame: Within the three days of clinical evaluation

  3. Arch Height Flexibility

    Arch Height Flexibility will be calculated by the \[(arch height while sitting - arch height while standing) / 0.4 x body weight\] x 100 (m/kN) formula. Higher values represent the more flexible medial longitudinal arch structure.

    Time frame: Within the three days of clinical evaluation

  4. Kellgren Lawrence stage of knee osteoarthritis

    It is a radiological grading of knee osteoarthritis with a value between 0 to 4. Medial and lateral tibiofemoral compartments are evaluated on weight-bearing anteroposterior knee radiograph in terms of joint space narrowing, subchondral periosteal sclerosis, subchondral cyst and osteophytic formations. Zero means no radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis, while 4 indicates advanced knee osteoarthritis.

    Time frame: Within the three days of clinical evaluation

  5. Anatomical tibiofemoral angle

    It is the angle, measured on a weight-bearing, full-length anteroposterior lower limb radiograph, between the anatomical axes of the femur and tibia. The normal value of the anatomical tibiofemoral angle is between 4 to 6 degrees of valgus. A higher positive value will indicate more valgus posture of the knee, while lower or negative values will be related to varus deformity.

    Time frame: Within the three days of clinical evaluation

  6. Mechanical tibiofemoral angle

    It is the angle, measured on a weight-bearing, full-length anteroposterior lower limb radiograph, between the lines drawn from the femoral head to the femoral intercondylar notch and from the tibial interspinous point to the tibial mid-plafond. The mechanical tibiofemoral angle is approximately 1-1.5 degrees of varus for a knee in normal alignment. In this study, to ensure consistency with the anatomical tibiofemoral angle values, the direction of angulation will be noted as a positive or negative value for the valgus or varus, respectively.

    Time frame: Within the three days of clinical evaluation

  7. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores for both knees

    WOMAC is a specific, valid and reliable tool for measuring disability in the knee and hip osteoarthritis. It includes 24 questions under three sub-domains: pain, stiffness, and physical function. Each question is scored on a Likert scale as 0=none, 1=mild, 2=moderate, 3=severe, and 4=extreme. The total score is defined by the \[(sum of the scores)/96\]x100 formula and ranges from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate increased disability due to more severe pain, stiffness and impaired physical function.

    Time frame: Within the three days of clinical evaluation

  8. Visual analogous scale score for knee pain

    Participants are asked to mark the severity of their right and left knee pain in the past month on a 100 mm horizontal line; where point zero represents "no pain" and point 100 represents "the most severe pain possible". The result is noted in millimetres by measuring the distance from the "zero" to the marked point. Increasing values represent higher pain intensity.

    Time frame: Within the three days of clinical evaluation

Secondary outcomes

  1. Knee range of motions

    Flexion and extension range of motions will be measured using a goniometer regarding the neutral zero method for both knees. Decreased values represent a limited range of motion of the knee joint.

    Time frame: Within the day of clinical evaluation

  2. Time after pain onset (weeks)

    The duration of knee pain leading to hospital admission will be noted.

    Time frame: Within the day of clinical evaluation

06

Study locations

1 site
  • Gazi University Hospital, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
    Ankara, 06560, Turkey
07

References and documents

Publications

  • Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, Bole G, Borenstein D, Brandt K, Christy W, Cooke TD, Greenwald R, Hochberg M, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum. 1986 Aug;29(8):1039-49. doi: 10.1002/art.1780290816. PubMed 3741515 ↗
  • Williams DS, McClay IS. Measurements used to characterize the foot and the medial longitudinal arch: reliability and validity. Phys Ther. 2000 Sep;80(9):864-71. PubMed 10960934 ↗
  • Weimar WH, Shroyer JF. Arch height index normative values of college-aged women using the arch height index measurement system. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2013 May-Jun;103(3):213-7. doi: 10.7547/1030213. PubMed 23697727 ↗
  • Hillstrom HJ, Song J, Kraszewski AP, Hafer JF, Mootanah R, Dufour AB, Chow BS, Deland JT 3rd. Foot type biomechanics part 1: structure and function of the asymptomatic foot. Gait Posture. 2013 Mar;37(3):445-51. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.09.007. Epub 2012 Oct 26. PubMed 23107625 ↗
  • Zifchock RA, Theriot C, Hillstrom HJ, Song J, Neary M. The Relationship Between Arch Height and Arch FlexibilityA Proposed Arch Flexibility Classification System for the Description of Multidimensional Foot Structure. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2017 Mar;107(2):119-123. doi: 10.7547/15-051. Epub 2017 Feb 15. PubMed 28198638 ↗
  • Karatas L, Vuralli D, Gunendi Z. The effect of medial longitudinal arch height and medial longitudinal arch support insoles on postural balance in perimenopausal women. Turk J Med Sci. 2019 Jun 18;49(3):755-760. doi: 10.3906/sag-1808-39. PubMed 31023006 ↗
  • Marques Luis N, Varatojo R. Radiological assessment of lower limb alignment. EFORT Open Rev. 2021 Jun 28;6(6):487-494. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210015. eCollection 2021 Jun. PubMed 34267938 ↗
  • Moreland JR, Bassett LW, Hanker GJ. Radiographic analysis of the axial alignment of the lower extremity. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987 Jun;69(5):745-9. PubMed 3597474 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05656014
Lead sponsor
Gazi University
Responsible party
Levent Karataş (Investigator, MD, Gazi University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Dec 19, 2022
Start date
Dec 7, 2022
Primary completion
Jun 3, 2024
Completion
Jun 3, 2024
Last update
Aug 12, 2024

Study contacts

Levent Karataş, MD
principal investigator · Gazi University Faculty of Medicine

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Aug 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion