Current Pedorthics | November-December 2018 | Vol.50, Issue 6 | Page 32

Inverted posture ‘A Rearfoot good fit?’ variables and compared the differences in rearfoot posture between knees with and without PFOA. Subsequently, the values of calcaneus inverted angle were compared using analysis of covariance. Covariates included age, sex, BMI, TF joint K/L grade, corrected AAA, presence of varus thrust, and knee flexion ROM. These covariates were chosen based on clinical judgment and previous studies investigating factors associated with PFOA or rearfoot posture [21, 35–37]. The normality of calcaneus inverted angle was assessed using the Shapiro- Wilk test and the homogeneity of the variances between patients with and without PFOA was confirmed using the F-test. Age, years 74.69 ± 7.785 Female, no. (%) 51 (75.0) Body mass index, kg/m2 24.14 ± 3.753 Corrected anatomical axis angle, degrees 176.2 ± 4.951 Presence of varus alignment, no. (%)a 55 (80.9) Medial tibiofemoral joint K/L grade, no. (%)b Grade 2 48 (70.6) Grade 3 11 (16.2) Grade 4 9 (13.2) We further performed multiple logistic regression analyses and calculated odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% CIs. Logistic regression analyses were performed first with an unadjusted model and then with a propensity adjusted model. Due to the small sample size, we used propensity score adjustment including the above covariates. Data analyses were performed with JMP Pro 12.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). P-values <0.05 were considered statistically significant. Presence of varus thrust, no. (%) 12 (17.6) Results Figure 2 shows flowchart describing the inclusion of study participants. One-hundred- forty-three patients with medial knee OA were enrolled at baseline period (February 2014). Of these patients, 75 were excluded from this study; 41 could not be contacted or declined follow up for non-specific reasons; and 34 were excluded because of missing data on patient’s characteristics, radiography, and rearfoot posture at the 12 months follow up period (January 2015). Thus, our final 30 Table 1: Patients’ characteristics at follow up period (n = 68)a Pedorthic Footcare Association | www.pedorthics.org Knee range of motion, degrees Extensionc −6.471 ± 6.482 Flexion 140.8 ± 12.17 Presence of any PFOA, no. (%) 38 (55.9) Presence of mixed PFOA, no. (%) 19 (27.9) Presence of medial PFOA, no. (%) 22 (68.8) Presence of lateral PFOA, no. (%) 26 (32.4) Coexisting medial TFOA and any PFOA, no. (%) 38 (55.9) Calcaneus inverted angle, degreesd −0.357 ± 5.522 K/L grade: Kellgren/Lawrence grade; PFOA: patellofemoral osteoarthritis; TFOA: tibiofemoral osteoarthritis Except where otherwise indicated, values are mean ± SD a Varus alignment is defined as corrected anatomical axis angle < 179 degrees b If participants did not get worse their clinical symptoms within the 12-month follow-up period, radiography at baseline was used for K/L grade assessment c A negative value indicates that the knee is flexed d A positive value indicates inversion direction of the calcaneus