Background: To prospectively evaluate the reliability of a portable optical scanner compared to the water displacement technique for volumetric measurements of the foot and ankle and to compare the acquisition time associated with these two methods.
Methods: Foot volume was measured in 29
[...] Read more.
Background: To prospectively evaluate the reliability of a portable optical scanner compared to the water displacement technique for volumetric measurements of the foot and ankle and to compare the acquisition time associated with these two methods.
Methods: Foot volume was measured in 29 healthy volunteers (58 feet, 24 females and 5 males) by a 3D scanner (UPOD-S 3D Laser Full-Foot Scanner®) and by water displacement volumetry. Measurements were performed on both feet, up to a height of 10 cm above the ground. The acquisition time for each method was evaluated. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Lin’s Concordance Correlation Coefficient, and a Student’s
t-test were performed.
Results: Mean foot volume was 869.7 +/− 165.1 cm
3 (3D scanner) versus 867.9 +/− 155.4 cm
3 (water-displacement volumetry) (
p < 10
−5). The concordance of measurements was 0.93, indicative of a high correlation between the two techniques. Volumes were 47.8 cm
3 lower when using the 3D scanner versus water volumetry. After statistically correcting this underestimation, the concordance was improved (0.98, residual bias = −0.03 +/− 35.1 cm
3). The mean examination time was 4.2 +/− 1.7 min (3D optical scanner) versus 11.1 +/− 2.9 min (water volumeter) (
p < 10
−4).
Conclusions: Ankle/foot volumetric measurements performed using this portable 3D scanner are reliable and fast and can be used in clinical practice and research.
Full article
