Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
, 45 (9), 806-10

Effect of Image Resolution Manipulation in Rearfoot Angle Measurements Obtained With Photogrammetry

Comparative Study

Effect of Image Resolution Manipulation in Rearfoot Angle Measurements Obtained With Photogrammetry

I C N Sacco et al. Braz J Med Biol Res.


The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of image resolution manipulation on the photogrammetric measurement of the rearfoot static angle. The study design was that of a reliability study. We evaluated 19 healthy young adults (11 females and 8 males). The photographs were taken at 1536 pixels in the greatest dimension, resized into four different resolutions (1200, 768, 600, 384 pixels) and analyzed by three equally trained examiners on a 96-pixels per inch (ppi) screen. An experienced physiotherapist marked the anatomic landmarks of rearfoot static angles on two occasions within a 1-week interval. Three different examiners had marked angles on digital pictures. The systematic error and the smallest detectable difference were calculated from the angle values between the image resolutions and times of evaluation. Different resolutions were compared by analysis of variance. Inter- and intra-examiner reliability was calculated by intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC). The rearfoot static angles obtained by the examiners in each resolution were not different (P > 0.05); however, the higher the image resolution the better the inter-examiner reliability. The intra-examiner reliability (within a 1-week interval) was considered to be unacceptable for all image resolutions (ICC range: 0.08-0.52). The whole body image of an adult with a minimum size of 768 pixels analyzed on a 96-ppi screen can provide very good inter-examiner reliability for photogrammetric measurements of rearfoot static angles (ICC range: 0.85-0.92), although the intra-examiner reliability within each resolution was not acceptable. Therefore, this method is not a proper tool for follow-up evaluations of patients within a therapeutic protocol.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 2 articles


    1. ASPRS American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing What is ASPRS? Bethesda: American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing [cited 21/12/2007] [].
    1. Kernozek TW, Greer NL. Quadriceps angle and rearfoot motion: relationships in walking. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1993;74:407–410. - PubMed
    1. Sacco I, Alibert S, Queiroz B, Pripas D, Kieling I, Kimura A, et al. Confiabilidade da fotogrametria em relação a goniometria para avaliação postural de membros inferiores. Rev Bras Fisioter. 2007;11:411–417.
    1. Dunk NM, Chung YY, Compton DS, Callaghan JP. The reliability of quantifying upright standing postures as a baseline diagnostic clinical tool. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004;27:91–96. - PubMed
    1. Lima LC, Barauna MA, Sologurem MJ, Canto RS, Gastaldi AC. Postural alterations in children with mouth breathing assessed by computerized biophotogrammetry. J Appl Oral Sci. 2004;12:232–237. - PubMed

Publication types