Perception of footwear comfort and its relationship with the foot structure among youngest-old women and men

View article
PeerJ

Main article text

 

Introduction

  1. Do the youngest-old demonstrate differences between genders in selected features of foot morphology?

  2. Do the youngest-old show any inter-gender differences in the perception of shoe comfort?

  3. What are the relationships between the subjective perception of footwear comfort and the features of foot structure in youngest-old women and men?

Material & Methods

Participants

Design

  1. shoe length–length of the shoe;

  2. shoe forefoot width–width of the shoe in the forefoot region;

  3. shoe heel width–width of the shoe in the heel region;

  4. heel height–height at which the hindfoot is raised in relation to the forefoot;

  5. heel cushioning–softness/hardness of the midsole in the heel region;

  6. forefoot cushioning–softness/hardness of the midsole in the forefoot region;

  7. arch height–medial arch height of the insole;

  8. mediolateral control–position of the foot controlled by the shoe;

  9. overall comfort—overall impression of the shoe (Mündermann et al., 2002; Dinato et al., 2015).

Analysis

Results

Discussion

Conclusions

  1. Youngest-old women’s feet are shorter and narrower compared to men of the same age range. Sexual dimorphism does not concern the longitudinal arch, transverse arch, as well as the position of the hallux and the 5th digit.

  2. Youngest-old women, compared to men of the same age range, have a higher perception of shoe comfort in terms of the heel width, the arch height, the overall comfort of the footwear and the material properties of the footwear.

  3. In women, the perception of footwear comfort in terms of heel cushioning, forefoot cushioning, and medial arch improved as the transverse arch was lowered. On the other hand, in men, the perception of shoe comfort in terms of heel height increased as the longitudinal arch decreased, and the perception of the comfort of the arch height of the shoes improved as the foot width increased. The appropriate profile and design of the shoe allows for an increase in the contact surface of the foot with the shoe, hence the improvement of the perception of shoe comfort in people with lowered arch or with a widened forefoot.

Supplemental Information

Raw data applied for data analyses and preparation for Tables 15

DOI: 10.7717/peerj.12385/supp-1

Additional Information and Declarations

Competing Interests

The authors declare there are no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Ewa Puszczalowska-Lizis conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Karolina Koziol conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analyzed the data, prepared figures and/or tables, and approved the final draft.

Jaroslaw Omorczyk analyzed the data, authored or reviewed drafts of the paper, and approved the final draft.

Human Ethics

The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

The Bioethics Committee of the University of Rzeszow approved the study (Approval Ref. No. 4/04/2020).

Data Availability

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The raw data is available in the Supplemental File.

Funding

The authors received no funding for this work.

8 Citations 1,722 Views 225 Downloads

Your institution may have Open Access funds available for qualifying authors. See if you qualify

Publish for free

Comment on Articles or Preprints and we'll waive your author fee
Learn more

Five new journals in Chemistry

Free to publish • Peer-reviewed • From PeerJ
Find out more