Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the difference of four methods for collecting foot dimensions. One hundred and thirty healthy male and female students were recruited. The 7 measured foot dimensions were foot length, ball of foot length, outside ball of foot length, foot breadth diagonal, foot breadth horizontal, heel breadth and arch length. The ANOVA results indicated that there were significant differences between four measurement methods on the 7 foot dimensions. The foot dimensions obtained from the 3D scanning method was significantly greater than the others, except for no significant difference with manual technique in foot length and heel breadth dimensions. The dimension obtained from the digital footprint method showed significant differences with the footprint technique in outside ball of foot length and heel breadth dimensions. Moreover, the mean absolute difference (MAD) was calculated to evaluate the repeated precision. Results indicated that the greater MAD values were found in the manual method than the 3D scanning method in all the foot dimensions, except for foot length and heel breath. In summary, using different methods to collect foot dimensions tend to have significant differences in anthropometric measurements. When comparing the foot anthropometric data with other references, it is important to notice the method differences while taking measurements.