ブックタイトル教育医学 J.Educ.Health Sci.　第63巻　第2号　通巻 第288号

概要

教育医学 J.Educ.Health Sci.　第63巻　第2号　通巻 第288号

Keiko ABE, Tatsuya MIMURA, Hiroshi AKITAKE and Kan-ichi MIMURAprevious studies that suggest the negative impact offlat feet can be due to the setting of motor performancetasks. Lin et al. set such physical test tasks forpreschool children as squatting, standing up withoutsupport, raising a heel for as long as possible, walkingon toes, walking on heels, standing on one leg, andhopping on one leg 11) . In contrast, Tudor et al. set 17motor performances for testing children aged 11 to15 in the laboratory condition, including countermovement jump, hopping and balancing. Althoughthe motor performance tasks set by Tudor et al. 20)were to indicate speed, explosive power, reactiontime, and repetitive movements of lower legs, ourmotor ability tasks were more dynamic motorperformances in the field-based test than in thelaboratory condition. We were able to measure thesame fundamental motor ability tasks (sprint, broadjump, and ball throw abilities) and on a wider agegroup than previous studies, of 0 to 12. Furthermore,previous studies did not take gender difference intoconsideration 1,3,5,12) . Taking data from each gendermay have influenced our results, which causeddifferences from previous studies. However, in thepresent study we were not able to identify whatfactors generated the differences.Motor ability involves many kinds of tasks.However, we selected only 3 tasks to representmotor ability skills, so we still need to measuremany other physical fitness tests. Gallahue et al.recommended 23 fundamental motor performancestasks, which were classified broadly into 3 kinds,namely locomotor task, objective control task, andstability task 4) . The present study has discussedlocomotor tasks and objective control tasks, so wewould like to measure stability tasks in the future.Previous studies reported that many factors havebeen suggested to cause flat feet 11,18) . Therefore,what we need to conduct in the future is longitudinalstudies that can clarify the effects of such factors aspast habits and daily physical activities in childhood,as well as genetic characteristics.In summary, normal-arch feet ratio indicated72.4% in boy and 72.6% in girls by age 7. Ourfindings suggest that after the age of 4, boys withflat feet tend to show lower motor ability comparedboys with normal-arch feet. The sprint and jumpabilities of girls with normal-arch feet weresignificantly greater than girls with flat feet. As forthe throwing ability in girls, our data of preschooland school children did not show any correlationswith having flat feet.Ⅴ．AcknowledgmentsThe authors would also like to thank all children,parents, and teachers for their participation in thepresent study.Reference1）Chen KC, Yeh CJ, Kuo JF, Hsieh CL, YangSF and Wang CH (2011) Footprint analysisof flatfoot in preschool-aged children. Eur JPediatr, 170, 611-617.2）Cheng JCY, Leung SSF, Leung AKL, SherA and Mak AFK(1997) Change of foot sizewith weighbearing. A study of 2829 children3 to 8 years of age. Clin Orthop Relat Res,342, 123-131.3）Fixsen JA (1998) Problem feet in children. JR Soc Med, 91, 18-22.4）Gallahue DL, Ozumun JC and Goodway JD(2012) Understanding motor development:Infants, children, adolescents, adults. 7 th edition.McGraw-hill education, 305-3265）Hernandez AJ, Kimura LK, Laraya MHF andFavaro E (2007) Calculation of staheli's plantararch index and prevalence of flat feet: astudy with 100 children aged 5-9 years. ActaOrtop Bras, 15(2), 68-81.6）Hirasawa Y (1978) Measurement of foot surface.Poplar publishing Co., Ltd. Tokyo (inJapanese).7）Khodadadeh S and Welton E (1992) A. Forceplate readings of flat foot patients. J HumMov Stud, 23(2), 95-102.8）Khodadadeh S and Welton EA (1993) Gaitstudies of patients with flat feet. The Foot,3(4), 189-193.? 173 ?