SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 1
Download to read offline
Determination of Peak Pressure Using
F-Scan ® Sensors
Dr. Valdevit, Michelle Osorio, Bijan Mohazab
Introduction
• The Tekscan® F-Scan ® system : in-shoe
plantar pressure analysis used effectively
in gait analysis to provide dynamic
pressure values.
• The system was tested to find peak
pressure and location of peak pressure by
having each subject engage in a multitude
of positions with his/her eyes opened or
closed on both two feet and on the
dominant foot.
Results
• Peak Pressure values on one foot and two feet in
different positions (Figure 2) and location of peak
pressure on the foot (Figure 3).
Figure 2. A) Standard Deviation of two feet
testing was greater than that of one foot. B) A
greater peak pressure was shown in one foot than
in two feet.
Figure 3. Peak pressure was found to be most
prevalent in the heel.
Methods
• Subjects placed their feet on the F-Scan®
sensors and preconditioned and
calibrated their feet to the sensors
(Figure 1). The system was connected to
the computer via a USB cable.
Figure 1. System setup with
the foot sensor attached to
cuff ready to record peak
pressure data.
• The first subject stood in a vertical
position with his arms straight down and
stood on two feet. This position was
recorded for 5 seconds.
• A peak pressure analysis was conducted,
yielding graphs which ascertained the
peak pressure and average pressure
values as well as the location of the peak
pressure within the foot.
• Each position was repeated for three
trials, as well as the subsequent peak
pressure analysis, for each subject. The
data was tabulated in Excel. The three
trials were then averaged together for an
average peak pressure.
• When all twelve positions were recorded,
a one-way ANOVA and Tukey Post-Hoc
test was conducted to determine
statistical significance.
Discussion and Conclusion
• The ANOVA and Tukey Post-Hoc tests showed
that there were no statistical differences among
the positions during testing on one foot and
both feet.
• Peak pressure was greater in one foot since
there is less surface area for the pressure to be
distributed.
Stevens Summer Scholar’s
Program 2014
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
Arms Straight
Down, 2
Arms Straight
Out, 2
Head Tilted
Back Eyes
Open, 2
Head Tilted
Back Eyes
Closed, 2
Nose Touch
Eyes Open, 2
Nose Touch
Eyes Closed, 2
PeakPressure(PSI)
Positions
Peak Pressures on Two Feet
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Arms Straight Down, 1 Arms Straight Out, 1 Head Tilted Back Eyes
Open, 1
Nose Touch Eyes
Open, 1
Nose Touch Eyes
Closed, 1
PeakPressure(PSI)
Positions
Peak Pressures on One Foot
Peak Pressure Location Percentage (%)
Heel 83.73
Mound 1.19
Lateral Plantar Side 13.89
Upper Heel 1.19

More Related Content

Similar to Research Poster 2014

The Effects of Heel Lift Height on Back Squat Performance
The Effects of Heel Lift Height on Back Squat PerformanceThe Effects of Heel Lift Height on Back Squat Performance
The Effects of Heel Lift Height on Back Squat Performance
Christopher Johnston
 
BMES 2015_Poster_Revised
BMES 2015_Poster_RevisedBMES 2015_Poster_Revised
BMES 2015_Poster_Revised
Anil Oberoi
 
13 The Scien Þc Method Lab 1 14 .docx
13 The Scien Þc Method Lab 1 14 .docx13 The Scien Þc Method Lab 1 14 .docx
13 The Scien Þc Method Lab 1 14 .docx
hyacinthshackley2629
 
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
DFCOliveira
 
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
DFCOliveira
 
Measuring Chest Movement
Measuring Chest MovementMeasuring Chest Movement
Measuring Chest Movement
I'am Ajas
 
Aquatic CAP Poster-DCB-NRM
Aquatic CAP Poster-DCB-NRMAquatic CAP Poster-DCB-NRM
Aquatic CAP Poster-DCB-NRM
Nicole Miela
 

Similar to Research Poster 2014 (20)

Pft new
Pft newPft new
Pft new
 
Final dep ed physical fitness test
Final dep ed physical fitness testFinal dep ed physical fitness test
Final dep ed physical fitness test
 
COMMON METHODS OF MEASUREMENT.pptx
 COMMON METHODS OF MEASUREMENT.pptx COMMON METHODS OF MEASUREMENT.pptx
COMMON METHODS OF MEASUREMENT.pptx
 
PREVENTIVE AND CURATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE BAROPODOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR ERGONOM...
PREVENTIVE AND CURATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE BAROPODOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR ERGONOM...PREVENTIVE AND CURATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE BAROPODOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR ERGONOM...
PREVENTIVE AND CURATIVE IMPORTANCE OF THE BAROPODOMETRIC ANALYSIS FOR ERGONOM...
 
1362576205 kristiaan
1362576205 kristiaan1362576205 kristiaan
1362576205 kristiaan
 
The Effects of Heel Lift Height on Back Squat Performance
The Effects of Heel Lift Height on Back Squat PerformanceThe Effects of Heel Lift Height on Back Squat Performance
The Effects of Heel Lift Height on Back Squat Performance
 
BMES 2015_Poster_Revised
BMES 2015_Poster_RevisedBMES 2015_Poster_Revised
BMES 2015_Poster_Revised
 
13 The Scien Þc Method Lab 1 14 .docx
13 The Scien Þc Method Lab 1 14 .docx13 The Scien Þc Method Lab 1 14 .docx
13 The Scien Þc Method Lab 1 14 .docx
 
EFFECT OF POSTURAL CONTROL BIOMECHANICAL GAIN ON PSYCHOPHYSICAL DETECTION THR...
EFFECT OF POSTURAL CONTROL BIOMECHANICAL GAIN ON PSYCHOPHYSICAL DETECTION THR...EFFECT OF POSTURAL CONTROL BIOMECHANICAL GAIN ON PSYCHOPHYSICAL DETECTION THR...
EFFECT OF POSTURAL CONTROL BIOMECHANICAL GAIN ON PSYCHOPHYSICAL DETECTION THR...
 
ECGS Module 3B
ECGS Module 3BECGS Module 3B
ECGS Module 3B
 
lect 1 Anthropometry -.pdf
lect 1 Anthropometry -.pdflect 1 Anthropometry -.pdf
lect 1 Anthropometry -.pdf
 
Summary of Results PPT for Research Project
Summary of Results PPT for Research ProjectSummary of Results PPT for Research Project
Summary of Results PPT for Research Project
 
Flyer.Final
Flyer.FinalFlyer.Final
Flyer.Final
 
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
 
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
 
Protocolode Quiroprazia
Protocolode QuiropraziaProtocolode Quiroprazia
Protocolode Quiroprazia
 
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
Protocol%20 for%20cox%20technic%202014
 
Measuring Chest Movement
Measuring Chest MovementMeasuring Chest Movement
Measuring Chest Movement
 
Aquatic CAP Poster-DCB-NRM
Aquatic CAP Poster-DCB-NRMAquatic CAP Poster-DCB-NRM
Aquatic CAP Poster-DCB-NRM
 
SM PPT.ppt
SM PPT.pptSM PPT.ppt
SM PPT.ppt
 

Research Poster 2014

  • 1. Determination of Peak Pressure Using F-Scan ® Sensors Dr. Valdevit, Michelle Osorio, Bijan Mohazab Introduction • The Tekscan® F-Scan ® system : in-shoe plantar pressure analysis used effectively in gait analysis to provide dynamic pressure values. • The system was tested to find peak pressure and location of peak pressure by having each subject engage in a multitude of positions with his/her eyes opened or closed on both two feet and on the dominant foot. Results • Peak Pressure values on one foot and two feet in different positions (Figure 2) and location of peak pressure on the foot (Figure 3). Figure 2. A) Standard Deviation of two feet testing was greater than that of one foot. B) A greater peak pressure was shown in one foot than in two feet. Figure 3. Peak pressure was found to be most prevalent in the heel. Methods • Subjects placed their feet on the F-Scan® sensors and preconditioned and calibrated their feet to the sensors (Figure 1). The system was connected to the computer via a USB cable. Figure 1. System setup with the foot sensor attached to cuff ready to record peak pressure data. • The first subject stood in a vertical position with his arms straight down and stood on two feet. This position was recorded for 5 seconds. • A peak pressure analysis was conducted, yielding graphs which ascertained the peak pressure and average pressure values as well as the location of the peak pressure within the foot. • Each position was repeated for three trials, as well as the subsequent peak pressure analysis, for each subject. The data was tabulated in Excel. The three trials were then averaged together for an average peak pressure. • When all twelve positions were recorded, a one-way ANOVA and Tukey Post-Hoc test was conducted to determine statistical significance. Discussion and Conclusion • The ANOVA and Tukey Post-Hoc tests showed that there were no statistical differences among the positions during testing on one foot and both feet. • Peak pressure was greater in one foot since there is less surface area for the pressure to be distributed. Stevens Summer Scholar’s Program 2014 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Arms Straight Down, 2 Arms Straight Out, 2 Head Tilted Back Eyes Open, 2 Head Tilted Back Eyes Closed, 2 Nose Touch Eyes Open, 2 Nose Touch Eyes Closed, 2 PeakPressure(PSI) Positions Peak Pressures on Two Feet 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Arms Straight Down, 1 Arms Straight Out, 1 Head Tilted Back Eyes Open, 1 Nose Touch Eyes Open, 1 Nose Touch Eyes Closed, 1 PeakPressure(PSI) Positions Peak Pressures on One Foot Peak Pressure Location Percentage (%) Heel 83.73 Mound 1.19 Lateral Plantar Side 13.89 Upper Heel 1.19