IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i12p2126-d240283.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stability of Three Different Sanitary Shoes on Healthcare Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study

Author

Listed:
  • José Manuel Sánchez-Sáez

    (Research, Health and Podiatry Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Nursing and Podiatry, Universidade da Coruña Ferrol, 15403 Ferrol, Spain)

  • Patricia Palomo-López

    (University Center of Plasencia, University of Extremadura, 10600 Plasencia, Spain)

  • Ricardo Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo

    (Faculty of Nursing, Physiotherapy and Podiatry, Complutense University of Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

  • César Calvo-Lobo

    (Nursing and Physical Therapy Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of León, Ponferrada, 24401 León, Spain)

  • Marta Elena Losa-Iglesias

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Rey Juan Carlos University, 28922 Alcorcón, Spain)

  • Andrés López-del-Amo-Lorente

    (Faculty of Health Sciences, Catholic University of Murcia, 30107 Murcia, Spain)

  • Daniel López-López

    (Research, Health and Podiatry Unit, Department of Health Sciences, Faculty of Nursing and Podiatry, Universidade da Coruña Ferrol, 15403 Ferrol, Spain)

Abstract

Background: The main purpose of this research was to determine the stability of three different sanitary shoes on nurses with eyes open and closed with respect to barefoot condition. In addition, the secondary aim was to determine the reliability of stability measurements under these different conditions. Methods: A crossover quasi-experimental study (NCT03764332) was performed. Twenty-six nurses who wore different sanitary shoes (Eva Plus Ultralight ® , Gym Step ® and Milan-SCL Liso ® ) were evaluated with respect to barefoot condition for stability measures on the Podoprint ® podobarometric and stabilometry tool and with eyes open and closed. Furthermore, the reliability of stability measurements was determined by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) under these different conditions. Results: Between-groups comparisons of the static and stabilometry podobarometric data with eyes open showed statistically significant differences ( p < 0.05). Milan-SCL Liso ® sanitary shoes improved podobarometric data of forefoot force and distribution with respect to barefoot condition. Eva Plus Ultralight ® and Gym Step ® sanitary shoes increased the stroke length mean, stroke surface mean, and anterior speed mean as well as reduced y axis displacement mean with respect to barefoot condition. Similar findings were determined for measurements with eyes closed. ICCs ranged from poor to excellent reliability (ICC = 0.010–0.995). Conclusions: Sanitary shoes improved podobarometric and stabilometry stability with respect to barefoot condition.

Suggested Citation

  • José Manuel Sánchez-Sáez & Patricia Palomo-López & Ricardo Becerro-de-Bengoa-Vallejo & César Calvo-Lobo & Marta Elena Losa-Iglesias & Andrés López-del-Amo-Lorente & Daniel López-López, 2019. "Stability of Three Different Sanitary Shoes on Healthcare Workers: A Cross-Sectional Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-15, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:12:p:2126-:d:240283
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/12/2126/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/12/2126/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:12:p:2126-:d:240283. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.