Genç Erişkin Bireylerde Ayak Bileği Eklem Hareket Açıklığı ile Ayak Fonksiyon İndeksi Arasındaki İlişkinin Değerlendirilmesi: Tek Merkezli Prospektif Çalışma

Öz

Amaç: Mevcut çalışmada sağlıklı gençlerde ayak bileği eklem hareket açıklığı referans değerlerinin sunulması ve bu değerler ile arasındaki korelasyonun tespiti amaçlanmıştır.
Materyal ve metod: Her katılımcının her iki ayağı için dorsi ve plantar fleksiyon, inversiyon ve eversiyon hareket açıklıkları ile FFI skoru arasındaki korelasyon değerlendirilmiştir. Buna göre değişkenler right ankle dorsiflexion angle (RDF), left ankle dorsiflexion angle (LDF), right ankle plantar flexion angle (RPF), left ankle plantar flexion angle (LPF), right ankle inversion angle (RI), left ankle inversion angle (LI), right ankle eversion angle (RE), left ankle eversion angle (LE), right ankle FFI score (RFFIS), left ankle FFI score (LFFIS) olarak belirlenmiştir.
Bulgular: Değişkenlerin istatistiksel analiz sonuçları sırasıyla erkek ve kadın olmak üzere; RDF için 23,9 (19,3-32,2) ve 27 (19,9-41,6), RPF için 45,4 (27,5-50,6) ve 44,5 (23,6-50,6), LPF için 45,2 (30,7-52,2) ve 44,5 (26,7-50,6), RI için 18 (13-28) ve 19 (12-33), LI için 17 (12-32) ve 19,5 (13-32), RE için 24 (13-36) ve 27.5 (18-48), LE için 27 (15-36) ve 27 (18-40) şeklindedir. Ortalama ve standart sapma değerleri sırasıyla LDF için 22,3±2,2 ve 23,2±4,1, RAFIS için 11,7±5,2 ve 12,7±4,5, LAFIS için 10,1±5,5 ve 10,3±4,7 olarak hesaplanmıştır.
Sonuç: Çalışma bulguları FFI skorları ile ayak bileğine ait gonyometrik ölçümler arasında net bir korelasyon olmadığı göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ayak bileği biyomekaniği
• Ayak fonksiyon indeksi
• Eklem hareket açıklığı
• Gonyometre
• Referans değerler

Etik Beyan

The study was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University (approval no: 43, date: February 2, 2026).

An Assessment of the Relationship Between Ankle Joint Range of Motion and the Foot Function Index in Young Adults: A Single-Center Prospective Study

Öz

Background: This study aims to present reference values for ankle joint range of motion in healthy young adults and to determine the correlation between these values.
Materials and Methods: The correlation between the range of motion of dorsiflexion, plantarflexion, inversion and eversion in both feet of each participant and their Foot Function Index (FFI) score was evaluated. In line with this, the variables were selected as right ankle dorsiflexion angle (RDF), left ankle dorsiflexion angle (LDF), right ankle plantar flexion angle (RPF), left ankle plantar flexion angle (LPF), right ankle inversion angle (RI), left ankle inversion angle (LI), right ankle eversion angle (RE), left ankle eversion angle (LE), right ankle FFI score (RFFIS), left ankle FFI score (LFFIS).
Results: The correlation between the range of motion of dorsiflexion, plantarflexion, inversion and eversion in both feet of each participant and their FFI score was evaluated. In line with this, the variables were selected as RDF, LDF, RPF, LPF, RI, LI, RE, LE, RFFIS, LFFIS.
Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate that there is no clear correlation between FFI scores and goniometric measurements for the ankle.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Ankle biomechanics
• Foot function index
• Range of motion
• Goniometer
• Reference values

Etik Beyan

The study was approved by the Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University (approval no: 43, date: February 2, 2026).

Kaynakça

1. Ray G, Kurtul İ, Ray A. Determination of foot angles in healthy adult Turkish population. International Journal of Current Medical and Biological Sciences. 2024;4(3):103-10.
2. Taşkın Şenol G, Kürtül I, Ray A, Ahmetoglu G. The relationship between body mass index and pronation response of the foot in healthy young individuals. Northwestern Medical Journal. 2023;3(2):81-7.
3. Brockett CL, Chapman GJ. Biomechanics of the ankle. Orthopaedics and Trauma. 2016;30(3):232-8.
4. Lyu BJ, Lee CL, Chang WD, Chang NJ. Effects of vibration rolling with and without dynamic muscle contraction on ankle range of motion, proprioception, muscle strength and agility in young adults: A crossover study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17(1):354.
5. Cervera-Garvi P, Galan-Hurtado MH, Ortega-Avila AB, Rodriguez AM, Reca EL, Dominguez AC, et al. Measurement properties of the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire: A systematic review. Clinical Rehabilitation. 2024;38(9):1226-37.
6. Tomruk M, Soysal Tomruk M, Alkan E, Gelecek N. The relationship between ankle range of motion, muscle strength and balance in young adults. SDÜ Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi. 2020;11(2):155-62.
7. Kim SG, Kim WS. Effect of ankle range of motion (ROM) and lower-extremity muscle strength on static balance control ability in young adults: A regression analysis. Medical Science Monitor. 2018;24:3168-75.
8. Grieve R, Byrne B, Clements C, Davies LJ, Durrant E, Kitchen O. The effects of foam rolling on ankle dorsiflexion range of motion in healthy adults: A systematic literature review. Journal of Bodywork & Movement Therapies. 2022;30:53-9.

9. Alawna MA, Unver BH, Yuksel EO. The reliability of a smartphone goniometer application compared with a traditional goniometer for measuring ankle joint range of motion. Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association. 2019;109(1):22-9.
10. Guillén-Rogel P, Emeterio CS, Marín PJ. Associations between ankle dorsiflexion range of motion and foot and ankle strength in young adults. Journal of Physical Therapy Science. 2017;29(8):1363-7.
11. Mohammad WS, Elattar FF, Elsais WM, AlDajah SO. Validity and reliability of a smartphone and digital inclinometer in measuring the lower extremity joints range of motion. Montenegrin Journal of Sports Science and Medicine. 2021;10(2):47-52.
12. Agel J, Beskin JL, Brage M, Guyton GB, Kadel NJ, Saltzman CL, et al. Reliability of the Foot Function Index: A report of the AOFAS Outcomes Committee. Foot & Ankle International. 2005;26(11):962-7.
13. Yagci G, Erel S, Okunakol V. Validation of the Turkish version of the Revised Foot Function Index for patients with foot and ankle disorders. Foot and Ankle Surgery. 2020;26(6):624-9.
14. Ibrahim T, Beiri A, Azzabi M, Best AJ, Taylor GJ, Menon DK. Reliability and validity of the subjective component of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Clinical Rating Scales. Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery. 2007;46(2):65-74.
15. Okumuş M, Demir G, Borman P, Kültür T, Yörübulut S. Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the foot function index in patients with calcaneal heel spur. Journal of Surgery and Medicine. 2018;2(2):118-22.
16. Akbulut T, Aydemir İ, Karaman ME. Eklem hareket açıklığı, sağlık ve sportif performans. Gaziantep Üniversitesi Spor Bilimleri Dergisi. 2023;8(3):174-91.
17. Amin DJ, Herrington LC. The relationship between ankle joint physiological characteristics and balance control during unilateral stance. Gait Posture. 2014;39(2):718-22.
18. Cordell KC, Wilke BK, Haupt ET, Dohse NM, Berger TG, Heckman MG, et al. Validity and reliability of teleconference-based goniometry for measuring ankle and great toe joint range of motion. Cureus. 2025;17(4):e81964.
19. Yalıman A, Şen Eİ, Eskiyurt N, Budiman-Mak E. Turkish translation and adaptation of Foot Function Index in patients with plantar fasciitis. Turkish Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2014;60(3):212-22.
20. Słomka KJ, Michalska J. Relationship between the strength of the ankle and toe muscles and functional stability in young, healthy adults. Scientific Reports. 2024;14:9125.
21. Panoutsakopoulos V, Kotzamanidou MC, Papaiakovou G, Kollias IA. The ankle joint range of motion and its effect on squat jump performance with and without arm swing in adolescent female volleyball players. Journal of Functional Morphology and Kinesiology. 2021;6(1):14.
22. Alghadir AH, Iqbal ZA, Iqbal A, Ahmed H, Ramteke SU. Effect of chronic ankle sprain on pain, range of motion, proprioception, and balance among athletes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17(15):5318.
23. Akbari H, Shimokochi Y, Sheikhi B. Ankle dorsiflexion range of motion and landing postures during a soccer-specific task. PLoS One. 2023;18(3):e0283150.
24. Dekker TJ, Hamid KS, Easley ME, DeOrio JK, Nunley JA, Adams SB. Ratio of range of motion of the ankle and surrounding joints after total ankle replacement. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2017;99(7):576-82.
25. Landorf KB, Kaminski MR, Munteanu SE, Zammit GV, Menz HB. Clinical measures of foot posture and ankle joint dorsiflexion do not differ in adults with and without plantar heel pain. Scientific Reports. 2021;11:6451.
26. Keskin Aktan A, Kutlay Ö. The relationship between body mass index and pes planus, balance, quality of life and pain levels in sedentary female and male. Value in Health Sciences. 2022;12(1):58-64.
27. Ugbolue UC, Robson C, Donald D, Yates EL, Gu Y, Sanders M, et al. Joint angle, range of motion, force, and moment assessment: Responses of the lower limb to ankle plantarflexion and dorsiflexion. Applied Bionics and Biomechanics. 2021;2021:1232468.