Bare foot and in-shoe plantar pressure in diabetic males and females – is there difference?

5Citations
Citations of this article
25Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Purpose: High plantar pressure is one of the factors associated with foot ulceration in diabetic patients. High-risk limbs could eventually be identified through this approach. The study was conducted to evaluate the difference in the barefoot and in-shoe plantar pressure among diabetic males and females. Patients and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted and purposive sampling was employed for the recruitment of subjects in King Abdullah walking center. The dynamic plantar pressure generated by each subject was recorded using “novel footprint software” and up to five successful trials were collected for each subject of right and left foot. Results: The mean age of female and male patients was 50.6 ± 13.4 and 46.07 ± 11.17, respectively. The mean difference between the weights was higher in males. The barefoot peak plantar pressure between gender in left limb was found significant. Moreover, the mean difference in plantar pressure at maximum concentration and maximum force of right and left limb between males and females was found statistically significant. The mean difference in in-shoe plantar pressure at maximum force of left limb between males and females was found statistically significant. Conclusion: As the prevalence of diabetes is increasing, the risk of plantar pressure also increasing simultaneously. The difference in plantar pressure among diabetic males and females is critically important as our study indicated that the bare foot and in-shoe plantar pressure was found higher in males than females as males had higher weight than females. Further longitudinal studies are required to be conducted in this context.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Altayyar, S. S. (2021). Bare foot and in-shoe plantar pressure in diabetic males and females – is there difference? Medical Devices: Evidence and Research, 14, 271–276. https://doi.org/10.2147/MDER.S312739

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free