title: The hallux valgus angle of the margo medialis pedis as an alternative to the measurement of the metatarsophalangeal hallux valgus angle.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Currently, the metatarsophalangeal angle (hallux valgus angle) is measured based on radiographic images. However, using X-ray examinations for epidemiological or screening purposes would be unethical, especially in children. For this reason it is discussed to measure the hallux valgus angle of the margo medialis pedis (medial border of the foot) documented on foot outline drawings or foot scans. As a first step on the way to prove the validity of those approaches this study assesses the hallux valgus angle measured on the margo medialis pedis based on the same x-ray pictures as the metatarsophalangeal hallux valgus.
  
  
  METHODS
  Radiographic images of the foot were obtained from patients with symptomatic hallux valgus malformation. Twelve sets of contact copies of the 63 originals were made, and were marked and measured according to three different methods, each one performed by two observers and with two repeated measurements. Thus, data sets from 756 individual assessments were entered into the multifactorial statistical analysis.Comparisons were made between the angle of the margo medialis pedis and the metatarsophalangeal angle, which was determined by two different methods. To determine the inter- and intraobserver reliability of the different methods, each assessment was conducted by two independent experts and repeated after a period of several weeks.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The correlations between the hallux valgus angles determined by the three different methods were all above r=0.89 (p<0.001) and thus highly significant. The values obtained by measuring the margo medialis pedis angle, however, were on average 4.8 degrees smaller than the metatarsophalangeal angles. No significant differences were found between the observers. No systematic deviations for any observer between repeated measurements were detected.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Measurements of the radiographic hallux angle of the margo medialis pedis are reliable and show high correlation with the metatarsophalangeal angle. Because the hallux valgus angles based on margo medialis pedis measurements were slightly but statistically significantly smaller, these measurements should be considered conservative estimates of the metatarsophalangeal angle. Significant differences between hallux valgus angles based on radiographic and non-radiographic material are unlikely. However this question has to be treated in a second stage in detail.
authors.affiliation: EMCO Clinic Bad Dürrnberg, Prof, Martin Hell Str, 7-9, 5422 Bad Dürrnberg, Austria. dr.klein@ortho-mondsee.at.
authors.forename: Christian
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Klein
authors.forename: Wieland
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Kinz
authors.forename: Alexander
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Zembsch
authors.forename: Elisabeth
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Groll-Knapp
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Kundi
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D005260:Female; D005528:Foot / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D006215:Hallux Valgus / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008682:Metatarsal Bones / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D008683:Metatarsophalangeal Joint / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D008875:Middle Aged; D011859:Radiography; D055815:Young Adult
references.citation: Orthopade. 2009 Nov;38(11):1117-26
references.pmid: 19730810
references.citation: Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005 Aug;44(8):1061-6
references.pmid: 15901901
references.citation: BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2009 Dec 17;10:159
references.pmid: 20015410
references.citation: Stat Methods Med Res. 1999 Jun;8(2):135-60
references.pmid: 10501650
references.citation: J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2001 Feb;91(2):74-8
references.pmid: 11266481
references.citation: Foot Ankle. 1980 Nov;1(3):151-8
references.pmid: 7319431
references.citation: Foot Ankle Int. 1998 Aug;19(8):532-6
references.pmid: 9728700
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1958 Jan;40-A(1):41-58; discussion 59-60
references.pmid: 13491607
references.citation: Br J Radiol. 1951 Jan;24(277):18-26
references.pmid: 14801487
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995 Feb;77(2):205-13
references.pmid: 7844126
references.citation: Foot Ankle Int. 2007 Feb;28(2):186-93
references.pmid: 17296137
references.citation: Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10
references.pmid: 2868172
references.citation: J Foot Ankle Res. 2010 Sep 27;3:21
references.pmid: 20868524
references.citation: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012 Jul;42(7):642-8
references.pmid: 22282040
references.citation: Foot Ankle. 1990 Aug;11(1):6-11
references.pmid: 2210536
references.citation: Foot Ankle Int. 1995 May;16(5):267-70
references.pmid: 7633582
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1951 Aug;33-B(3):376-91
references.pmid: 14861244
references.citation: J Anat. 1955 Jul;89(3):355-61
references.pmid: 13251965
references.citation: Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007 Sep;15(9):1008-12
references.pmid: 17387024
references.citation: BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010 Sep 20;11:215
references.pmid: 20854678
references.citation: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1974 Jul;56(5):923-31
references.pmid: 4847240