| Abstract | Uvod: Analiza parametara hoda ima bitnu ulogu u procjeni normalnog i patološkog hoda. Također, funkcija stopala u toj analizi posebno je bitna jer su upravo stopala glavna točka oslonca tijekom hoda i neprestano se prilagođavaju različitim podlogama i redovito su izloženi velikim silama. Glavni cilj istraživanja jest ispitati distribuciju plantarnog pritiska i usporediti dva pedobarografa. Materijali i metode: U istraživanju je dobrovoljno sudjelovalo 45 studenata (64% ispitanika su ženskog spola, a 36% ispitanika muškog spola) u dobi između 18. i 25. godine života. Ispitanici su tjelesne mase 71,31± 12,05 kg, visine 1,74 ± 0,08 m i indeksa tjelesne mase 20,02 ± 1,76. Svi ispitanici bili su u jednoj grupi te su mjereni na dva različita pedobarografa (MobileMat i Biomech), i to u statici i dinamici. Dobiveni podaci obrađeni su u programu Statistica 13.0 proizvođača TIBCO Software Inc. Deskriptivnom statistikom dobilo se sljedeće: aritmetička sredina, standardna devijacija, p vrijednost. Rezultati: Podaci dobiveni Biomech pedobarografom statistički se značajno razlikuju od podataka dobivenih MobileMat pedobarorgafom, bilo da se radilo o podacima dobivenih iz mjerenja u statici ili dinamici. Distribucija površine oslonca na lijevom stopalo razlikuje se između dva pedobarografa kada se uspoređuje lijevo stopalo, dok je distribucija površine oslonca desnog stopala jednaka, iako postoje veliku razlike u njihovim vrijednostima. Najveće razlike uočene su kod distribucije maksimalne sile i najvećeg plantarnog pritiska. Biomech pedobarograf zabilježio je gotovo dvostruko veće vrijednosti nego MobileMat pedobarograf. Rezultati dobiveni Biomech pedobarografom bliži su rezultatima dobivenih od strane ostalih stručnjaka, barem što se tiče distribucije navedenih parametara. Podaci dobiveni iz mjerenja u dinamici, također se razlikuju samo u vrijednostima, dok je distribucija ista na oba pedobarografa. Zaključak: Informacije koje ovo istraživanje pruža izrazito su bitne jer nam govori u koju vrstu pedobarografa možemo biti pouzdaniji, međutim treba imati na umu, da je premalo istraživanja koje bi ove navode moglo potvrditi. Također, istraživanje je pokazalo kako bi uvijek trebalo raditi mjerenja na istim metodama, zbog mogućih razlika koje su i vidljive u ovom radu. |
| Abstract (english) | Introduction: The Analysis of parameters of gait has a crucial role in the assessment of normal and pathological gait. The function of foot in this analysis is very important because feet represents the main point of support during a walk and also they are constantly adapting to different surfaces and are regularly exposed to high forces. The main goal of this research is to examine the distribution of plantar pressure and to compare two pedobarographs. Materials and methods: In this research, I have examined 45 students who voluntarily choose to participate (64% respondents/examinee were women and 36% were men) and who were between 18 and 25 years old. The body weight of respondents/examinee was 71,31± 12,05 kg, height 1,74 ± 0,08 m, body mass index 20,02 ± 1,76. All respondents were a part of one group and they were measured on two different pedobarographs (MobileMat i Biomech). They were measured in statics and dynamics. Obtained data was processed in a program called Statistica 13.0 who was designed by TIBCO Software Inc. Descriptive statistics provide the following data: arithmetic mean, standard deviation, p value. Results: There is huge statistical difference in the date that was measured by Biomech pedobarograph and in the date that was measured by MobileMat pedobarograph. Statistical difference can be seen in the date measured in statics but also in dinamics. The distribution of the surface of the support on the left foot differs between the two pedobarographs when comparing the left foot, while the distribution of the surface of the support of the right foot is the same, although there are big differences in their values. The biggest differences were observed in the distribution of maximum force and the biggest plantar pressure. Also the Biomech pedobarograph noted almost twice as large values than MobileMat pedobarograph. The results obtained by Biomech pedobarograph are closer to the results obtained by other experts, at least in terms of the distribution of these parameters. Data obtained from measurements in dynamics also differ only in values, while the distribution is the same on both pedobarographs. Conclusion: The informations that this research paper offers are very crucial because they provide data about reliability of pedobarographs. However we should bare in mind that this research is too small to confirm this allegations. Also, this research has shown that measurements should always be performed on the same methods, due to possible differences that are also visible in this paper. |
