Evaluation of the Pain and Foot Functions in Women with Hallux valgus deformities

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 2, 144 - 149, 16.06.2016

Burcu Talu

https://doi.org/10.5799/ahinjs.01.2016.02.0587

Cited By: 1

Öz

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate
whether deformity affects pain and associated functional status in women
with hallux valgus (HV).

Methods: The study included 27 women (mean age:
40.5±10.3 years) diagnosed with HV and with a deformity level of two or
more as determined using the Manchester scale. Demographic data of the
participants were recorded. In addi­tion, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was
used to determine the intensity of pain during walking. To determine the
function affected by pain and deformity, Foot Function Index (FFI), and
the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society MTP-IP (AOFAS MTP-IP)
Scale along with AOFAS Midfoot (MF) Scale were used.

Results: Based on the study results, we determined a
statistically significant relationship between foot function and pain
among our patients (p<0.05). These significant relationships were
observed between the pain and total scores of the Foot Function Index
(p<0.05), the pain parameter of AOFAS MTP-IP and the pain and total
scores of AOFAS midfoot-pain scale (p<0.05).

Conclusion: It was concluded that when assessing and
planning treatment for hallux valgus, all health profession­als dealing
with foot health, pathologies, deformities and treatment should consider
the patient as a whole, bearing in mind that pathologies can affect not
only the perceived symptoms of individuals, but also their normal
functions through various physical and social limitations. J Clin Exp Invest 2016; 7 (2): 144-149

Anahtar Kelimeler

Foot, hallux valgus, pain, function

Kaynakça

• 1. Coughlin MJ and Jones CP. Hallux valgus: demographics, etiology, and radiographic assessment. Foot & Ankle Int 2007;28:759-77. 2. Coughlin MJ. Re: intra-and-inter-observer reliability of the distal metatarsal articular angle in adult hallux valgus, Chi T, et al, Foot Ankle Int. 23:722-726,2002. Foot & Ankle Int 2004;25:443-4. 3. Bock P, Kristen KH, Kroner A, et al. Hallux valgus and car - tilage degeneration in the first metatarsophalangeal joint. J Bone Joint Surg Brit 2004;86:669-73. 4. Easley ME and Trnka HJ. Current concepts review: hallux valgus part 1: pathomechanics, clinical assessment, and non - operative management. Foot & Ankle Int 2007;28:654-9. 5. Robinson AH, Limbers JP. Modern concepts in the treatment of hallux valgus. J Bone Joint Surg Brit 2005;87:1038-45. 6. Menz HB and Lord SR. Foot problems, functional impair - ment, and falls in older people. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 1999;89:458-67. 7. Şükür E, Azboy İ, Demirtaş A, et al. Lindgren-Turan metodu ile halluks valgus cerrahisi uygulanan hastaların yaşam ka - litesi. J Clin Exp Invest 2012;3:23-8. 8. Doty JF and Coughlin MJ. Hallux valgus and hypermo - bility of the first ray: facts and fiction. Int Orthopaedics 2013;37:1655-60. 9. Wai-Chi Wong D, Wang Y, Zhang M, et al. Functional resto - ration and risk of non-union of the first metatarsocuneiform arthrodesis for hallux valgus: A finite element approach. J Biomechanics 2015;48:3142-8. 10. Uchiyama E, Kitaoka HB, Luo ZP, et al. Pathomechanics of hallux valgus: biomechanical and immunohistochemical study. Foot & Ankle Int 2005;26:732-8. 11. Yu J, Cheung JT, Fan Y, et al. Development of a finite el - ement model of female foot for high-heeled shoe design. Clin Biomechanics 2008;23 Suppl 1: S31-38. 12. Roddy E, Zhang W, Doherty M. Prevalence and associa - tions of hallux valgus in a primary care population. Arthrit Rheum 2008;59:857-62. 13. Dawson J, Thorogood M, Marks SA, et al. The prevalence of foot problems in older women: a cause for concern. J Public Health Med. 2002;24:77-84. 14. DiPreta JA. Managing and treating common foot and ankle problems. Preface. Med Clin North Am 2014;98: xvii-xviii. 15. Menz HB, Morris ME. Footwear characteristics and foot problems in older people. Gerontology 2005;51:346-51. 16. Talu Burcu, Bayramlar K, Bek N, et al. Validity and re - liability of the Turkish version of the Manchester-Oxford foot questionnaire (MOXFQ) for hallux valgus deformity evaluation. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turcica 2015;5:123-9. 17. Garrow AP, Papageorgiou A, Silman AJ, et al. The grading of hallux valgus. The Manchester Scale. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 2001;91:74-8. 18. Mendell JR, Florence J. Manual muscle testing. Muscle & Nerve 1990;13:S16-S20. 19. Gallagher EJ, Liebman M and Bijur PE. Prospective validation of clinically important changes in pain sever - ity measured on a visual analog scale. Ann Emerg Med 2001;38:633-8. 20. Deenik AR, de Visser E, Louwerens JW, et al. Hallux val - gus angle as main predictor for correction of hallux valgus. BMC Musculoskeletal Dis 2008;9:70. 21. Baumhauer JF, Nawoczenski DA, DiGiovanni BF, et al. Re - liability and validity of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Clinical Rating Scale: a pilot study for the hallux and lesser toes. Foot & Ankle Int 2006;27:1014-9. 22. Agel J, Beskin JL, Brage M, et al. Reliability of the Foot Function Index: A report of the AOFAS Outcomes Commit - tee. Foot & Ankle Int 2005;26:962-7. 23. Scott G, Menz HB, Newcombe L. Age-related differences in foot structure and function. Gait & Posture 2007;26:68- 75. 24. Harada K, Oka K, Shibata A, et al. [Relationships between foot problems, fall experience and fear of falling among Japanese community-dwelling elderly]. [Nihon koshu eisei zasshi] Japanese J Public Health 2010;57:612-23. 25. Hardy RH, Clapham JC. Observations on hallux val - gus; based on a controlled series. J Bone Joint Surg Brit 1951;33-B:376-91. 26. Baravarian B. Hallux valgus and bunion surgery. Clin Podi - atr Med Surg 2014;31: xiii-xiv. 27. Dawson J, Boller I, Doll H, et al. Responsiveness of the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) com - pared with AOFAS, SF-36 and EQ-5D assessments fol - lowing foot or ankle surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Brit 2012;94:215-21.