Skip to main content
Download PDF

Effects of high-heeled shoes on lower extremity biomechanics and balance in females: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Public Health volume 23, Article number: 726 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

High-heeled shoes (HHS) are widely worn by women in daily life. Limited quantitative studies have been conducted to investigate the biomechanical performance between wearing HHS and wearing flat shoes or barefoot. This study aimed to compare spatiotemporal parameters, kinematics, kinetics and muscle function during walking and balance between wearing HHS and flat shoes or barefoot.

Methods

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, PubMed Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, CINAHL Complete and Web of Science databases were searched from the earliest record to December 2021. A modified quality index was applied to evaluate the risk of bias, and effect sizes with 95% confidence intervals were calculated as the standardized mean differences (SMD). Potential publication bias was evaluated graphically using funnel plot and the robustness of the overall results was assessed using sensitivity analyses.

Results

Eighty-one studies (n = 1501 participants) were included in this study. The reduced area of support requires the body to establish a safer and more stable gait pattern by changing gait characteristics when walking in HHS compared with walking in flats shoes or barefoot. Walking in HHS has a slight effect on hip kinematics, with biomechanical changes and adaptations concentrated in the knee and foot–ankle complex. Females wearing HHS performed greater ground reaction forces earlier, accompanied by an anterior shift in plantar pressure compared with those wearing flat shoes/barefoot. Furthermore, large effect sizes indicate that wearing HHS resulted in poor static and dynamic balance.

Conclusion

Spatiotemporal, kinematic, kinetic and balance variables are affected by wearing HHS. The effect of specific heel heights on women’s biomechanics would benefit from further research.

Peer Review reports

Background

High-heeled shoes (HHS) have been widely worn among women throughout several centuries all over the world. HHS is a type of footwear where the heel is higher than the forepart and usually features a narrow toe section, curved plantar area and a stiff heel cap [1]. Previous evidence showed that 37% to 69% of women wear HHS daily and that 59% of women wear them for 1–8 h per day [2, 3]. However, wearing HHS has been reported to be related to hallux valgus, musculoskeletal pain and first-party injuries, with the incidence of injuries almost doubling from 2002 to 2012 (7.1% to 14.1%) [4,5,6]. Therefore, identifying the risk factors associated with the incidence of these injuries is essential to protect foot health and implement prevention strategies, such as reduced foot length and increased arch height [7], increased knee varus moment [8] and decreased postural stability [9].

Most studies have confirmed that the effects of wearing HHS are not limited to the foot–ankle complex. The kinematic effects are transmitted up the lower extremity in a chain reaction [1, 10], ultimately leading to changes in spatiotemporal outcomes [11,12,13], kinematics [11, 14,15,16,17,18,19,20], kinetics [12, 21, 22], muscle activity [7, 23,24,25] and energy expenditure [16, 26]. The available evidence suggests that walking in HHS requires a special neural control that differs from that used in barefooted walking [27]. HHS alter the alignment of the body, thus influencing the body’s centre of gravity (COG) and adversely affecting gait biomechanics and postural stability, impairing static and dynamic balance, and increasing the risk of falls for HHS wearers [9, 28,29,30,31].

Various studies have investigated the effect of HHS on gait, posture and relevant injuries on young women [1, 5, 32,33,34]. A meta-analysis found that walking in HHS increased knee flexion moment, flexion angle and varus moment during the early stance phase [35]. However, to date, meta-analyses of the effects of HHS on gait spatiotemporal outcomes, joint kinematics, kinetics, muscle activity and balance in female have been lacking. Changes in women’s gait parameters when wearing HHS and the associated neuromuscular and biomechanical adaptations can provide accurate and effective recommendations for future efforts to eliminate the negative effects of high heels [1]. Therefore, the aim of this review is to collect the available evidence to investigate the effects of wearing HHS on lower limbs biomechanics and balance in females and provide guidance for further research in this area.

Methods

The systematic review was conducted in accordance with guidelines provided by the Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement (PROSPERO registration number CRD42021291135) [36].

Search strategy

PubMed Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, CINAHL Complete and Web of Science electronic databases were searched from inception until December 2021. Full search terms and strategies are available in Additional file 1. No restrictions were set on literature type or publication status.

Eligibility criteria

Journal articles that evaluated the effects of HHS on lower extremity biomechanics and balance in healthy women were included, covering indicators such as gait spatiotemporal, joint kinematics, kinetics and muscle activity variables during horizontal walking, as well as static and dynamic balance variables. The specific inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found in Additional file 2.

Study selection

All the studies searched were imported into EndNote X9 (Clarivate Analytics), and the duplicate articles were removed by a reviewer (ZZ). Each title and abstract were screened for eligibility inclusion by two independent reviewers (YL and XH). Then, the reference lists of all included articles were screened manually to identify any relevant studies that might have been missed by electronic searches. Any disagreements between the two reviewers were resolved with a consensus meeting, if necessary, and the decision was made by a third reviewer (LW).

Data extraction

Study characteristics were extracted by one reviewer (ZZ) and verified by a second (YL) using a standardized template, including (1) article details (authors name and year of publication), (2) participant characteristics (sample size, age, body height, body mass and HHS wearing experience), (3) HHS used (heel height), (4) experimental characteristics (comparisons and walking speed) and (5) biomechanical variables investigated (spatiotemporal, kinematics, kinetics, muscle function and balance). Any discrepancies were discussed by all reviewers.

Assessment of risk of bias

A modified Downs and Black’s Quality Index (QI) tool with high reliability and validity was used by two reviewers (PL and XH) to assess the methodological quality [37]. According to the purpose of this review, the QI contains following four categories: study reporting (items 1–4, 6–7 and 10), external validity (items 11 and 12), internal validity (items 16, 18, 20, 22 and 23) and power (item 27) [38, 39] (see Additional file 3). Articles with scores of 6 and below (≤ 40%), 6–12 (40%–80%) and 12 and above (≥ 80%) were considered low, moderate and high quality, respectively [40]. Discrepancies were discussed and resolved through a consensus meeting. If a consensus was not achieved, then a third reviewer (LW) served as the tiebreaker. The mean kappa agreement between the reviewers was 0.96.

Data analysis

Means and standard deviations for included variables were extracted to calculate the between-group standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for study comparisons [38]. Meta-analysis for each outcome was performed using Review Manager (version 5.3, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark) with at least two studies with available data on HHS (≥ 3 cm) compared with flat shoes or barefoot [41]. When a study was conducted on females with and without experience wearing HHS, they were included in the meta-analysis as two groups of data. To include as much data as possible, when studies were reported for both limbs, they were treated as independent data. Heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 and Q statistics, where I2 > 50% or a significant Q statistic indicated statistical heterogeneity, when I2 values were > 50%, the random-effect model was applied for data analyses, otherwise the fixed-effect model was used [42]. The effect size was categorized as trivial (≤ 0.20), small (0.20–0.50), moderate (0.50–0.80) or large (≥ 0.80) [43]. Subgroup analysis was conducted based on different biomechanical variables. Sensitivity analyses were performed to investigate the robust of the pooled results and funnel plots were applied to evaluate the potential publication bias [44]. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

Results

Search results

The initial electronic database searches identified 2483 records (Fig. 1). After duplicates and screening of titles and abstracts were removed, 137 studies remained. An additional four records were included through cross-referencing. After full-text screening, 81 articles met the eligibility criteria and were included in this review.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Flowchart of the systematic review selection process

Full size image

Quality assessment of included studies

Total scores from the QI and a breakdown for each category for all included articles are shown in Fig. 2. The number of studies graded as low, moderate and high quality was 3, 63 and 15, respectively. The QI scores of assessed studies ranged from 5 to 14, with a mean (SD) = 10.95 (1.91) points.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Methodological quality for the included studies

Full size image

Study characteristics

The sample sizes ranged from 3 to 71, with 15 being the most common (n = 14), and the mean (SD) was 18 (12). The mean (SD) age of all participants was 25.08 (4.08) years and 24.74 (4.19) years for studies included in the review and meta-analysis, respectively. Nine articles compared women with and without HHS wearing experience [9, 16, 18, 31, 45,46,47,48,49]. In addition to several studies that used the subjects’ own HHS with different heel heights [17, 22, 50,51,52,53,54,55,56], the heel heights involved in this study ranged from 3 to 18 cm, with 9 cm (n = 11), 10 cm (n = 11), 6 cm (n = 10) and 7 cm (n = 10) being most commonly used. The walking speed involved a wide range from 0.56 m/s to 1.61 m/s, with 1.3 m/s being the most frequent (n = 7) and the mean (SD) was 1.17 (0.21) m/s (see Additional file 4).

Effect of HHS on lower extremity biomechanics and balance

Spatiotemporal characteristics

Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant effects for wearing HHS on stance time, stride time, single leg support time and step frequency during level walking (p ≥ 0.10). Large effects indicated that walking in HHS resulted in shorter swing time (SMD = 0.65; 95% CI 0.33, 0.97; p < 0.001), step length (SMD = 1.49 95% CI 0.88, 2.11; p < 0.001), stride length (SMD = 0.78; 95% CI 0.44, 1.11; p < 0.001), step width (SMD = 0.85; 95% CI 0.53, 1.16; p < 0.001) and walking velocity (SMD = 0.75; 95% CI 0.48, 1.03; p < 0.001). The subgroup analysis showed that walking with HHS provoked a longer double leg support time (percentage: SMD =  − 1.55; 95% CI − 1.89, − 1.20; p < 0.001; total: SMD =  − 0.88; 95% CI − 1.12, − 0.63; p < 0.001) (Fig. 3 and Additional file 5). No clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots for the related parameters, except for step length and step width (see Additional file 6). For all relevant parameters, the exclusion of individual studies did not trigger a significant change in the overall results in the sensitivity analyses.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Meta-analysis of temporal characteristics during walking in high-heeled shoes compared with flat shoes or barefoot. IV inverse variance, CI confidence interval, HHS high-heeled shoes

Full size image

Kinematics

Hip

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increase in range of motion (ROM) (SMD =  − 1.59; 95% CI − 2.26, − 0.91; p < 0.001) during gait cycle when walking with HHS. HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on peak flexion and extension during stance phase and gait cycle and flexion at foot strike (p ≥ 0.05) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots (see Additional file 6). In the sensitivity analyses, only the peak flexion angle during gait cycle showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the article written by Snow and Williams [15].

Knee

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increase in flexion at foot strike (SMD =  − 0.42; 95% CI − 0.63, − 0.22; p < 0.001) and flexion during mid-stance (SMD =  − 0.71; 95% CI − 0.97, − 0.45; p < 0.001), but a decrease in peak flexion (SMD = 0.61; 95% CI 0.05, 1.16; p 0.03) and ROM (SMD = 1.12; 95% CI 0.39, 1.85; p 0.003) during gait cycle and flexion at toe-off (SMD = 0.84; 95% CI 0.53, 1.15; p < 0.001) when walking with HHS. HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on peak flexion during stance phase and peak extension during stance phase and gait cycle (p ≥ 0.10) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots (see Additional file 6). In the sensitivity analyses, only the peak flexion angle during gait cycle showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the articles written by Snow and Williams [15] and Di Sipio et al. [57].

Foot–ankle complex

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant greater plantarflexion in peak plantarflexion during stance phase (SMD = 2.37; 95% CI 1.41, 3.33; p < 0.001) and gait cycle (SMD = 2.17; 95% CI 1.15, 3.18; p < 0.001), peak dorsiflexion during stance phase (SMD = 2.99; 95% CI 1.99, 4.00; p < 0.001) and gait cycle (SMD = 1.56; 95% CI 0.62, 2.50; p 0.001) and plantarflexion at foot strike (SMD = 2.64; 95% CI 1.47, 3.80; p < 0.001) and toe-off (SMD = 1.08; 95% CI 0.65, 1.51; p < 0.001) when walking with HHS. Conversely, ROM decreased statistically significantly during gait cycle (SMD = 1.71; 95% CI 1.06, 2.36; p < 0.001). HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on the rearfoot angle at foot strike and peak inversion during stance phase (p ≥ 0.10) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots (see Additional file 6). In the sensitivity analyses, only the rearfoot angle at foot strike showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the article written by Ebbeling et al. [16].

Kinetics

Hip

Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant effect of HHS on peak flexion moment and peak extension moment during gait cycle (p ≥ 0.08) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots (see Additional file 6). In the sensitivity analyses, only the peak extension moment during gait cycle showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the article written by Esenyel et al. [13].

Knee

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increase in peak flexion (SMD =  − 0.59; 95% CI − 0.93, − 0.26; p < 0.001) and extension (SMD =  − 0.40; 95% CI − 0.76, − 0.04; p 0.03) moments during gait cycle when walking with HHS. HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on peak adduction and abduction moments during gait cycle (p ≥ 0.32) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots (see Additional file 6). In the sensitivity analyses, only the peak extension moment during gait cycle showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the articles written by Esenyel et al. [13] and Lee et al. [58].

Foot–ankle complex

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant decrease in peak plantarflexion moment during gait cycle (SMD = 0.90; 95% CI 0.38, 1.42; p < 0.001) when walking with HHS. HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on peak dorsiflexion moment during gait cycle (p = 0.37) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots and the exclusion of individual studies did not trigger a significant change in the overall results in the sensitivity analyses (see Additional file 6).

Ground reaction forces

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increase in the first (SMD =  − 0.58; 95% CI − 0.88, − 0.28; p < 0.001) and the second (SMD =  − 1.11; 95% CI − 1.63, − 0.59; p < 0.001) peak vertical ground reaction force (GRF) and % time to the second peak vertical GRF (SMD =  − 0.78; 95% CI − 1.14, − 0.43; p < 0.001) when walking with HHS. HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on % time to the first peak vertical GRF (p = 0.21) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots and the exclusion of individual studies did not trigger a significant change in the overall results in the sensitivity analyses (see Additional file 6).

Plantar pressure

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increase in peak pressure under forefoot (hallux: SMD =  − 1.26; 95% CI − 1.54, − 0.98; p < 0.001; other toes: SMD =  − 1.52; 95% CI − 2.08, − 0.95; p < 0.001; the first metatarsals: SMD =  − 1.45; 95% CI − 1.90, − 1.00; p < 0.001; the second and third metatarsals: SMD =  − 1.18; 95% CI − 1.54, − 0.82; p < 0.001; the fourth and fifth metatarsals: SMD =  − 0.63; 95% CI − 1.09, − 0.17; p 0.007), but a decrease in peak pressure under the midfoot (total: SMD = 1.62; 95% CI 1.01, 2.23; p < 0.001; lateral: SMD = 1.67; 95% CI 1.08, 2.25; p < 0.001; medial: SMD = 0.61; 95% CI 0.18, 1.04; p 0.006) and heel (lateral: SMD = 0.81; 95% CI 0.39, 1.24; p < 0.001; medial: SMD = 1.42; 95% CI 0.66, 2.19; p < 0.001) when walking with HHS. HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on peak pressure under total heel (p = 0.07) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots (see Additional file 6). In the sensitivity analyses, the peak pressure under the medial midfoot showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the article written by Guo et al. [59] and the peak pressure under the total heel showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the article written by Penny et al. [60].

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increase in impact force (SMD =  − 1.25; 95% CI − 2.02, − 0.49; p 0.001), maximum force in the hallux (SMD =  − 1.71; 95% CI − 2.30, − 1.12; p < 0.001) and other toes (SMD =  − 1.84; 95% CI − 2.48, − 1.20; p < 0.001) when walking with HHS. Conversely, a statistically significant decrease in maximum force was observed in the heel (lateral: SMD = 0.70; 95% CI 0.45, 0.94; p < 0.001; medial: SMD = 1.11; 95% CI 0.40, 1.83; p 0.002) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots and the exclusion of individual studies did not trigger a significant change in the overall results in the sensitivity analyses (see Additional file 6).

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increase contact area in the hallux (SMD =  − 2.09; 95% CI − 2.70, − 1.47; p < 0.001) and other toes (SMD =  − 1.97; 95% CI − 2.64, − 1.30; p < 0.001), but a decrease in contact area in the heel (lateral: SMD = 0.26; 95% CI 0.02, 0.50; p 0.03; total: SMD = 0.28; 95% CI 0.10, 0.46; p 0.002) when walking with HHS. HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on contact area in the medial heel (p = 0.08) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots (see Additional file 6). In the sensitivity analyses, only the contact area in the lateral heel showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the article written by Shang et al. [61].

Lower extremity muscle function

Nineteen studies investigated the effects of HHS on muscle function. However, the differences in the studied muscles and indexes were not sufficient for the meta-analysis.

Balance

Meta-analysis showed a statistically significant increase in the time spent during the timed up and go test (SMD =  − 0.60; 95% CI − 0.81, − 0.40; p < 0.001) and mean anterior–posterior COP sway during standing (SMD =  − 0.88; 95% CI − 1.32, − 0.44; p < 0.001) when wearing HHS. Conversely, a statistically significant decrease occurred in functional reach test score (SMD = 0.55; 95% CI 0.23, 0.87; p < 0.001), single leg stance time (SMD = 2.52; 95% CI 0.95, 4.09; p 0.002) and limits of stability test scores (COG movement velocity: SMD = 0.61; 95% CI 0.24, 0.97; p 0.001; directional control: SMD = 0.39; 95% CI 0.19, 0.58; p < 0.001). HHS did not have a statistically significant effect on mean medial–lateral COP sway and mean medial–lateral and anterior–posterior COP sway velocity during standing, and medial–lateral and anterior–posterior COP sway during walking (p ≥ 0.23) (see Additional file 5). For all relevant parameters, no clear asymmetries were identified in the funnel plots (see Additional file 6). In the sensitivity analyses, only the single leg stance time showed a significant change in the overall result after removing the article written by Tomac et al. [62].

Discussion

The purpose of this systematic review was to explore the current evidence for the effects of HHS on lower limb biomechanics and balance in females to provide guidance for future research. This study showed a full evidence map of walking gait and postural control with HHS. The findings from this systematic review suggest that HHS significantly affect lower extremity biomechanics and balance in females (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4
figure 4

Summary of significant differences between HHS and flat shoes/barefoot biomechanics and balance found with meta-analyses. The up and down arrows represent greater and lower in HHS compared to flat shoes/barefoot, respectively. HHS high-heeled shoes; ROM range of motion; GRF ground reaction force; TUGT time up and go test; AP anterior–posterior; SLST single leg stance test; LoS limits of stability test

Full size image

Reduced area of support when walking in HHS requires the body to establish a safer and more stable gait pattern by changing gait characteristics compared with walking barefoot or in flat shoes [13, 18, 63]. Shorter step length, stride length and flight time and greater time spent with the feet in contact with the ground contribute to this requirement and attempt to counteract the instability of walking in HHS, which was depicted in our findings. Furthermore, HHS have poorer cushioning properties compared with flat shoes or trainer shoes, thus weakening the GRF absorption ability and potential kinetic energy that lower extremities already process, thereby enabling a shorter step length [26]. The instability caused by HHS ultimately leads to a significant reduction in walking speed [10]. The findings on step frequency are inconsistent, with no significant differences in step frequency in our study, possibly because the preferred walking speed of the participants had a large variation and part of the study was conducted on a treadmill at a fixed speed, whereas previous studies showed that walking at different speeds with HHS produces different walking characteristics [8, 64, 65]. In the funnel plot, the step length and step width showed a significant asymmetry, which indicates a large bias, therefore, the overall results need to be treated with caution.

The available evidence suggests that HHS have a slight effect on hip kinematics and kinetics during walking, with biomechanical changes and adaptations concentrated in the knee and ankle joints [19, 47]. As shown in our results, only ROM during gait cycle at the hip joint was significantly different between walking in HHS and flat shoes/barefoot. Compensatory changes in joint kinematics are generated to better respond to the load, as evidenced by increased flexion of the proximal joint [47], supported by the increased flexion of knee joint at foot strike and during mid-stance in this study. Surprisingly, no significant increase occurred in the peak flexion of knee when walking in HHS, perhaps because both flat shoes and barefoot were regarded as control group and involved a wide range of heel heights (3 cm to 12 cm) in our study. The knee joint was already in a more flexed position at foot strike when walking in HHS may contribute to the reduction in knee ROM during gait cycle and flexion at toe-off. Decreased ROM is indicated as a stiff joint, showing significant loss of movement, which alerts HHS wearers should pay more attention to knee joint protection to prevent musculoskeletal injuries [19, 47, 66]. Ankle maintains greater plantarflexion throughout gait cycle as a corollary to increased heel height. When HHS are worn, the resulting increased ankle plantarflexion brings the GRF vector closer to the centre of the ankle and increases the vertical impact loading in gait [16, 48]. The increased load can be reduced by adaptive changes in the kinematics of the proximal joint or through direct absorption by the soft tissues [67]. Furthermore, wearing HHS could lead to increased load on the ligaments and muscles surrounding the joints of lower limbs, which may trigger tendonitis of the muscle–tendon unit, inflammation of the bursa or progressive stretching of the ligaments around the joint [15]. Reduced ankle ROM in high-heeled gait possibly because continuous plantarflexion, which weakens the effect of the triceps surae on ankle joint and causes a reduction in the propulsion of ankle [68]. No differences were found in rearfoot movement when comparing HHS with flat shoes, potentially due to the limited available data and hence the lack of statistical power [15, 16, 69].

To the best of our knowledge, several mechanisms may contribute to the increased knee peak flexion and extension moments during high-heeled gait. One mechanism is that the increased knee flexion at foot strike places the centre of the knee relatively more forward, increasing the knee flexion torque from the vertical GRFs, hence the increased knee flexion moment may be a crucial compensatory mechanism to compensate for the relative instability caused by HHS, which also reflecting the crucial role of the knee in weight acceptance and shock absorbing [8, 13, 14, 70]. Moreover, the increase in peak knee flexion moment may partially compensate for the decrease in ankle moment, which is similar to the findings of our study [24]. The increased heel height is accompanied by an increase in the distance between the centre of the knee and ground, thus extending the lever arm of the tibia, which requires greater knee extension moment to resist GRFs [13, 19, 35]. An existing challenge is to explain the lack of significant differences in peak adduction and abduction moments in the current study. One possible explanation is the inclusion of HHS with different constructions and heel heights, making the results more variable. In addition, a threshold adaptation of HHS on knee joint may exist, where unnatural loading patterns are magnified when the heel height exceeds a certain value [15, 71, 72]. Although the peak ankle dorsiflexion moment did not differ between the two groups, the reduction in peak plantarflexion moment when walking in HHS implies the presence of eccentric activity of the muscles around the ankle playing a role in maintaining stability in the passive plantarflexion [47]. Specifically, the greater ankle plantarflexion obviously shortens fascicle length, Achilles tendon moment arm and forefoot lever arm, bringing GRFs closer to the centre of ankle and reducing the requirement for the plantarflexion moment [13, 24, 73]. The plantarflexed position of the ankle also puts the gastrocnemius and soleus muscles in a shortened position, which is detrimental to the work of the muscles [13]. Therefore, to propel the body forward, ankle joint will generate greater power [24, 74].

Body is exposed to greater impact forces earlier and the dynamic loading on the musculoskeletal system is increased in high-heeled gait [16]. The greater plantarflexion of ankle and the increased vertical GRFs exerted on the forefoot during stance as a result of the interior shift of the COG are the main contributors to these changes [15, 16]. In general, when the ankle is plantarflexed, the foot tends to supination and adduction [75]. Therefore, the increased plantarflexion of the ankle leads to reduced pronation during support with HHS, and part of the shock absorbing function of pronation may be lost, resulting in greater peak vertical GRF [15]. Peak pressure, maximum force and contact area are significantly higher in the forefoot than in the midfoot and rearfoot when walking in HHS compared with walking in flat shoes or barefoot, supporting previous studies [64, 76,77,78]. This finding suggests that HHS triggers a weight transfer mechanism that shifts plantar pressure to the forefoot, possibly due to the elevation of the heel causes a distinct anterior displacement of the COG of the body and reduces the cushioning effect of the arch [15, 64, 79]. The altered plantar pressure distribution may trigger arch deformation and Achilles tendon shortening, leading to discomfort and pain in the foot and the development of pathologies such as metatarsalgia and plantar fasciitis [55]. This finding also indicates that increased arch support and cushioning may improve walking ability and stability when walking in HHS, thereby providing a direction for the future design and development of HHS [80]. Specifically, the increased pressure exerted on the forefoot when walking in HHS may have a dramatic effect on the foot morphology, causing hallux valgus, varus deformity of the fifth toe and flattening feet [5, 6].

Although exploring the effects of HHS on muscle function was not possible through meta-analysis due to the lack of available data, to the authors’ knowledge, wearing HHS does alter muscle activation patterns [7, 15, 24, 80,81,82,83,84,85]. Wearing HHS is generally accepted to cause an imbalance in the intensity and timing of muscle activity around knee joint, as well as faster and greater synergistic contraction of the muscles around ankle [7, 85]. The generally increased muscle activity increases muscle energy expenditure, accompanied by increased muscle fatigue, which may induce a reduction in functional mobility during prolonged walking in HHS. As a result, the ability to control the stability of the foot and COG in response to postural perturbations is constrained, thereby increasing the risk of ankle sprains and/or falls [7, 16, 85].

Our study shows that wearing HHS increases the anterior–posterior COP sway and reduces the static and dynamic postural stability, which is consistent with previous research [7, 16, 86]. Changes in plantar somatosensory and proprioceptive afferents due to the greater plantarflexion position of the ankle are thought to be one of the main factors that contribute to changes in COP sway [87]. Furthermore, as the limits of the stability test are influenced by a combination of the neuromuscular system, the skeletomuscular system and cognition, a decrease in score indicates that a decrease in postural control is accompanied by an increased risk of falls [88]. As mentioned above, accelerated muscle fatigue is another factor that may affect postural control when walking in HHS [7, 16].

Several limitations should be considered when interpreting the findings of this review. Firstly, no subgroup analysis based on heel type and height was conducted in the meta-analysis due to the amount of available data, hence the current findings may underestimate the actual impact of high heels on biomechanics. Related to this situation, most meta-analyses were influenced by high levels of heterogeneity as well as unrobust overall results for several parameters, which indicates that caution should be taken when generalizing the effects of HHS on lower limb biomechanics and balance. In addition, three studies included older women, where age-related changes in body structure modified the biomechanical performance [23, 60, 65]. Older women generally have more experience wearing HHS, which contributed to the variability in outcomes. Long-term wearing of HHS also brings about adaptive changes in the biomechanics and control strategies of the human body [45, 89, 90]. Knowledge of the adaptive alterations caused by long-term wearing of HHS may provide better theoretical support for footwear design, offer guidance for novices in choosing HHS and effectively prevent high heel-related injuries [46]. Furthermore, various heel heights can affect everyone differently due to individual differences. Future studies should attempt to investigate more specific heel heights to determine the exact value/range of the threshold adaptation and to minimize the local damage caused by wearing HHS.

Conclusion

Walking in HHS exerts significant effects on the kinematics and kinetics of the knee and foot–ankle complex, as evidenced by the gait profiles altered in this study. Elevated heels caused the body to be exposed to greater GRFs earlier, accompanied by an anterior shift in plantar pressure. Furthermore, wearing HHS reduced static and dynamic postural control significantly. This meta-analysis provides comprehensive biomechanical data that may inform future efforts to mitigate the negative effects of wearing HHS on women in clinical practice. Moreover, more studies involving different heel heights and heel areas and long-term follow-up design are needed to confirm the changes in walking and balance caused by wearing HHS, as well as long-term neuromuscular adaptations, to provide a theoretical basis for maximizing the protection of women’s foot health and preventing HHS-related injuries.

Availability of data and materials

All data analysed during this study are included in its supplementary information files.

Abbreviations

CI:

Confidence interval

COG:

Centre of gravity

COP:

Centre of pressure

ES:

Effect size

GRF:

Ground reaction force

HHS:

High-heeled shoes

QI:

Quality Index

ROM:

Range of motion

SMD:

Standardised mean difference

References

  1. Cronin NJ. The effects of high heeled shoes on female gait: a review. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2014;24(2):258–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Frey C, Thompson F, Smith J, Sanders M, Horstman H. American orthopaedic foot and ankle society women’s shoe survey. Foot Ankle. 1993;14(2):78–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hsue BJ, Su FC. Kinematics and kinetics of the lower extremities of young and elder women during stairs ascent while wearing low and high-heeled shoes. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2009;19(6):1071–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Moore JX, Lambert B, Jenkins GP, McGwin Jr G. Epidemiology of high-heel shoe injuries in U.S. women: 2002 to 2012. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015;54(4):615–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Barnish MS, Barnish J. High-heeled shoes and musculoskeletal injuries: a narrative systematic review. BMJ Open. 2016;6(1): e010053.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Malick WH, Khalid H, Mehmood Z, Hussain H. Association of musculoskeletal discomfort with the use of high heeled shoes in females. J Pak Med Assoc. 2020;70(12(A)):2199–204.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gefen A, Megido-Ravid M, Itzchak Y, Arcan M. Analysis of muscular fatigue and foot stability during high-heeled gait. Gait Posture. 2002;15(1):56–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Barkema DD, Derrick TR, Martin PE. Heel height affects lower extremity frontal plane joint moments during walking. Gait Posture. 2012;35(3):483–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wan FKW, Yick KL, Yu WWM. Effects of heel height and high-heel experience on foot stability during quiet standing. Gait Posture. 2019;68:252–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Chien HL, Lu TW, Liu MW. Control of the motion of the body’s center of mass in relation to the center of pressure during high-heeled gait. Gait Posture. 2013;38(3):391–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Opila-Correia KA. Kinematics of high-heeled gait. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1990;71(5):304–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Eisenhardt JRCDPI, Foehl HC. Changes in temporal gait characteristics and pressure distribution for bare feet versus various heel heights. Gait Posture. 1996;4(4):280–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Esenyel M, Walsh K, Walden JG, Gitter A. Kinetics of high-heeled gait. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2003;93(1):27–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Opila-Correia KA. Kinematics of high-heeled gait with consideration for age and experience of wearers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1990;71(11):905–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Snow RE, Williams KR. High heeled shoes: Their effect on center of mass position, posture, three-dimensional kinematics, rearfoot motion, and ground reaction forces. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1994;75(5):568–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ebbeling CJ, Hamill J, Crussemeyer JA. Lower extremity mechanics and energy cost of walking in high-heeled shoes. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1994;19(4):190–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gehlsen G, Braatz JS, Assmann N. Effects of heel height on knee rotation and gait. Hum Mov Sci. 1986;5(2):149–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Cronin NJ, Barrett RS, Carty CP. Long-term use of high-heeled shoes alters the neuromechanics of human walking. J Appl Physiol. 2012;112(6):1054–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kerrigan DC, Todd MK, Riley PO. Knee osteoarthritis and high-heeled shoes. Lancet. 1998;351(9113):1399–401.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kerrigan DC, Lelas JL, Karvosky ME. Women’s shoes and knee osteoarthritis. Lancet. 2001;357(9262):1097–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yung-Hui L, Wei-Hsien H. Effects of shoe inserts and heel height on foot pressure, impact force, and perceived comfort during walking. Appl Ergon. 2005;36(3):355–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Speksnijder CM, vd Munckhof RJH, Moonen SAFCM, Walenkamp GHIM. The higher the heel the higher the forefoot-pressure in ten healthy women. Foot. 2005;15(1):17–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mika A, Oleksy L, Mika P, Marchewka A, Clark BC. The effect of walking in high- and low-heeled shoes on erector spinae activity and pelvis kinematics during gait. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;91(5):425–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Simonsen EB, Svendsen MB, Nørreslet A, Baldvinsson HK, Heilskov-Hansen T, Larsen PK, et al. Walking on high heels changes muscle activity and the dynamics of human walking significantly. J Appl Biomech. 2012;28(1):20–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee KH, Shieh JC, Matteliano A, Smiehorowski T. Electromyographic changes of leg muscles with heel lifts in women: therapeutic implications. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1990;71(1):31–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sarah A, Joanna L, Laura W. Influence of high heeled footwear and pre-fabricated foot orthoses on energy efficiency in ambulation. Foot Ankle Online. 2010;3:56–66.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Alkjær T, Raffalt P, Petersen NC, Simonsen EB. Movement behavior of high-heeled walking: how does the nervous system control the ankle joint during an unstable walking condition? PLoS ONE. 2012;7(5):e37390.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Luximon Y, Cong Y, Luximon A, Zhang M. Effects of heel base size, walking speed, and slope angle on center of pressure trajectory and plantar pressure when wearing high-heeled shoes. Hum Mov Sci. 2015;41:307–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gerber SB, Costa RV, Grecco LAC, Pasini H, Corrêa JCF, Lucareli PRG, et al. Interference of high-heel shoes in static balance among young women. Gait Posture. 2012;36:S58–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Mika A, Oleksy L, Kielnar R, Swierczek M. The influence of high- and low-heeled shoes on balance in young women. Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2016;18(3):97–103.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Chen Y, Li JX, Wang L. Influences of heel height on human postural stability and functional mobility between inexperienced and experienced high heel shoe wearers. PeerJ. 2020;8:e10239.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Wiedemeijer MM, Otten E. Effects of high heeled shoes on gait. A review Gait Posture. 2018;61:423–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang M, Jiang C, Fekete G, Teo EC, Gu Y. Health view to decrease negative effect of high heels wearing: a systemic review. Appl Bionics Biomech. 2021;2021:6618581.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Cowley EE, Chevalier TL, Chockalingam N. The effect of heel height on gait and posture: a review of the literature. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2009;99(6):512–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Nguyen LY, Harris KD, Morelli KM, Tsai LC. Increased knee flexion and varus moments during gait with high-heeled shoes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gait Posture. 2021;85:117–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev. 2015;4:1.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1998;52(6):377–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Tan JM, Auhl M, Menz HB, Levinger P, Munteanu SE. The effect of Masai Barefoot Technology (MBT) footwear on lower limb biomechanics: a systematic review. Gait Posture. 2016;43:76–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Kaur M, Ribeiro DC, Theis JC, Webster KE, Sole G. Movement patterns of the knee during gait following ACL reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Med. 2016;46(12):1869–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Fukuchi CA, Fukuchi RK, Duarte M. Effects of walking speed on gait biomechanics in healthy participants: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Syst Rev. 2019;8(1):153.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Kong L, Zhou X, Huang Q, Zhu Q, Zheng Y, Tang C, et al. The effects of shoes and insoles for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Res Sports Med. 2020;28(4):572–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327(7414):557–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Desmyttere G, Hajizadeh M, Bleau J, Begon M. Effect of foot orthosis design on lower limb joint kinematics and kinetics during walking in flexible pes planovalgus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2018;59:117–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Abril-Ulloa V, Flores-Mateo G, Solà-Alberich R, Manuel-y-Keenoy B, Arija V. Ferritin levels and risk of metabolic syndrome: meta-analysis of observational studies. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:483.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Chien H-L, Lu T-W, Liu M-W. Effects of long-term wearing of high-heeled shoes on the control of the body’s center of mass motion in relation to the center of pressure during walking. Gait Posture. 2014;39(4):1045–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Chien HL, Lu TW, Liu MW, Hong SW, Kuo CC. Kinematic and kinetic adaptations in the lower extremities of experienced wearers during high-heeled gait. Biomed Eng - Appl Basis Commun. 2014;26(3):1450042.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lee S, Xu M, Wang L, Li JX. Effect of high-heeled shoes on balance and lower-extremity biomechanics during walking in experienced and novice high-heeled shoe wearers. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2020;110(4):4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sinclair J, Brooks D, Butters B. Effects of different heel heights on lower extremity joint loading in experienced and in-experienced users: a musculoskeletal simulation analysis. Sport Sci Hlth. 2019;15(1):237–48.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Hapsari VD, Xiong S. Effects of high heeled shoes wearing experience and heel height on human standing balance and functional mobility. Ergonomics. 2016;59(2):249–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Gollnick PD, Tipton CM, Karpovich PV. Electrogoniometric study of walking on high heels. Res Q. 1964;35(Suppl):370–8.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Merrifield HH. Female gait patterns in shoes with different heel heights. Ergonomics. 1971;14(3):411–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Joseph J. The pattern of activity of some muscles in women walking on high heels. Ann Phys Med. 1968;9(7):295–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Kermani M, Ghasemi M, Rahimi A, Khademi-Kalantari K, Akbarzadeh-Bghban A. Electromyographic changes in muscles around the ankle and the knee joints in women accustomed to wearing high-heeled or low-heeled shoes. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2018;22(1):129–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Mapelli A, Colangelo V, Sidequersky FV, Annoni I, Lenci B, Sforza C. Effect of high-heeled shoes on three-dimensional bodyCoMdisplacement during walking. Gait Posture. 2012;35:S33–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. McBride ID, Wyss UP, Cooke TDV, Murphy L, Phillips J, Olney SJ. First metatarsophalangeal joint reaction forces during high-heel gait. Foot Ankle. 1991;11(5):282–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Nyska M, McCabe C, Linge K, Klenerman L. Plantar foot pressures during treadmill walking with high-heel and low- heel shoes. Foot Ankle Int. 1996;17(11):662–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Di Sipio E, Piccinini G, Pecchioli C, Germanotta M, Iacovelli C, Simbolotti C, et al. Walking variations in healthy women wearing high-heeled shoes: Shoe size and heel height effects. Gait Posture. 2018;63:195–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Soul L, Lin W, Jing XL. Effect of asymmetrical load carrying on joint kinetics of the lower extremity during walking in high-heeled shoes in young women. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2016;106(4):257–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Guo L-Y, Lin C-F, Yang C-H, Hou Y-Y, Liu H-L, Wu W-L, et al. Effect on plantar pressure distribution with wearing different base size of high-heel shoes during walking and slow running. J Mech Med Biol. 2012;12(01):1250018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Penny JØ, Speedtsberg MB, Kallemose T, Bencke J. Can an off-the-rack orthotic stiletto alter pressure and comfort scores in the forefoot, arch and heel? Ergonomics. 2018;61(8):1130–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Jiangyinzi S, Xiang G, Chen W, Li C, Chao Z, Jiazhang H, et al. Influences of high-heeled shoe parameters on gait cycle, center of pressure trajectory, and plantar pressure in young females during treadmill walking. J Orthop Surg. 2020;28(2):1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Tomac H, Topcu ZG, Altun N. How the stiletto heeled shoes which are popularly preferred by many women affect balance and functional skills? Health Care Women Int. 2020:1–11.

  63. Lee CM, Jeong EH, Freivalds A. Biomechanical effects of wearing high-heeled shoes. Int J Ind Ergonom. 2001;28(6):321–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Jandova S, Gajdoš M, Urbanová K, Mikuľáková W. Temporal and dynamic changes in plantar pressure distribution, as well as in posture during slow walking in flat and high-heel shoes. Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2019;21(4):131–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Titchenal MR, Asay JL, Favre J, Andriacchi TP, Chu CR. Effects of high heel wear and increased weight on the knee during walking. J Orthop Res. 2015;33(3):405–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Clarke GR, Willis LA, Fish WW, Nichols PJ. Preliminary studies in measuring range of motion in normal and painful stiff shoulders. Rheumatol Rehabil. 1975;14(1):39–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Robinovitch SN, McMahon TA, Hayes WC. Force attenuation in trochanteric soft tissues during impact from a fall. J Orthop Res. 1995;13(6):956–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Chien HL, Lu TW. Effects of shoe heel height on the end-point and joint kinematics of the locomotor system when crossing obstacles of different heights. Ergonomics. 2017;60(3):410–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Franklin ME, Chenier TC, Brauninger L, Cook H, Harris S. Effect of positive heel inclination on posture. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1995;21(2):94–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Steiner E, Boyer KA. Speed impacts joint power and work while walking in high heeled shoes. Footwear Sci. 2021;13(1):19–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Lee C. The effects of lower extremity angle according to heel-height changes in young ladies in their 20s during Gait. J Phys Ther Sci. 2014;26(7):1055–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Kerrigan DC, Johansson JL, Bryant MG, Boxer JA, Della Croce U, Riley PO. Moderate-heeled shoes and knee joint torques relevant to the development and progression of knee osteoarthritis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(5):871–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Bendix T, Sorensen SS, Klausen K. Lumbar curve, trunk muscles, and line of gravity with different heel heights. Spine. 1984;9(2):223–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Parvataneni K, Olney SJ, Brouwer B. Changes in muscle group work associated with changes in gait speed of persons with stroke. Clin Biomech. 2007;22(7):813–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Murray MP, Kory RC, Clarkson BH, Sepic SB. Comparison of free and fast speed walking patterns of normal men. Am J Phys Med. 1966;45(1):8–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Cong Y, Tak-Man Cheung J, Leung AKL, Zhang M. Effect of heel height on in-shoe localized triaxial stresses. J Biomech. 2011;44(12):2267–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Hong WH, Lee YH, Chen HC, Pei YC, Wu CY. Influence of heel height and shoe insert on comfort perception and biomechanical performance of young female adults during walking. Foot Ankle Int. 2005;26(12):1042–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Lee YH, Hong WH. Effects of shoe inserts and heel height on foot pressure, impact force, and perceived comfort during walking. Appl Ergons. 2005;36(3):355–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Baaklini E, Angst M, Schellenberg F, Hitz M, Schmid S, Tal A, et al. High-heeled walking decreases lumbar lordosis. Gait Posture. 2017;55:12–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Kit-lun Y, Ka-lai Y, Wong DP, Yee-nee L, Sun-pui N. Effects of in-shoe midsole cushioning on leg muscle balance and co-contraction with increased heel height during walking. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2018;108(6):449–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Foster A, Blanchette MG, Chou YC, Powers CM. The influence of heel height on frontal plane ankle biomechanics: Implications for lateral ankle sprains. Foot Ankle Int. 2012;33(1):64–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Wei-Hsien H, Yung-Hui L, Yen-Hui L, Tang SFT, Hsieh-Ching C. Effect of shoe heel height and total-contact insert on muscle loading and foot stability while walking. Foot Ankle Int. 2013;34(2):273–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Park KM, Chun SM, Oh DW, Kim SY, Chon SC. The change in vastus medialis oblique and vastus lateralis electromyographic activity related to shoe heel height during treadmill walking. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2010;23(1):39–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Yu D-F, Yu Y-G, Gao L, Shan G-B, Wang L. The influence of different-height heel shoes on motor function of lower limb joints in the young female performers. J Mech Med Biol. 2021;21(1):2050010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  85. Naik GR, Al-Ani A, Gobbo M, Nguyen HT. Does heel height cause imbalance during sit-to-stand task: surface EMG perspective. Front Physiol. 2017;8:626.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Forhan M, Gill SV. Obesity, functional mobility and quality of life. Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;27(2):129–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Masani K, Popovic MR, Nakazawa K, Kouzaki M, Nozaki D. Importance of body sway velocity information in controlling ankle extensor activities during quiet stance. J Neurophysiol. 2003;90(6):3774–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Rogers ME, Rogers NL, Takeshima N, Islam MM. Methods to assess and improve the physical parameters associated with fall risk in older adults. Prev Med. 2003;36(3):255–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Cha YJ. Analysis of differences in the degree of biomechanical adaptation according to habituation to different heel heights. ScientificWorldJournal. 2020;2020:1854313.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  90. Fu F, Zhang Y, Shu Y, Ruan G, Sun J, Baker JS, et al. Lower limb mechanics during moderate high-heel jogging and running in different experienced wearers. Hum Mov Sci. 2016;48:15–27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Adrian MJ, Karpovich PV. Foot instability during walking in shoes with high heels. Res Q. 1966;37(2):168–75.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Blanchette MG, Brault JR, Powers CM. The influence of heel height on utilized coefficient of friction during walking. Gait Posture. 2011;34(1):107–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Chhoeum V, Wang C-w, Jang S, Dong MS, Young KIM, Min-Hyung C. The effect of shoe heel types and Gait speeds on knee joint angle in healthy young women – a preliminary study. J Internet Comput Serv. 2020;21(6):41–50.

    Google Scholar 

  94. Chien HL, Liu MW, Lu TW, Kuo CC, Chung PC. Inter-joint sharing of total support moments in the lower extremities during gait in narrow-heeled shoes of different heights. Ergonomics. 2014;57(1):74–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Choi HS, Han SK, Kim YH. Effects on foot/ankle roll-over characteristics according to different heel heights during walking. Key Eng Mater. 2006;321–323:1022–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  96. Delafontaine AFPOGDS, Yiou E. High-heel shoes wear affects postural control during gait initiation in healthy young female adults. Comput Method Biomec. 2019;22:S154–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  97. Gastwirth BW, O’Brien TD, Nelson RM, Manger DC, Kindig SA. An electrodynographic study of foot function in shoes of varying heel heights. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1991;81(9):463–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Gu Y, Rong M, Ruan G. The outsole pressure distribution character during high-heeled walking. Procedia Environ Sci. 2011;8(1):464–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  99. Ho KY, Blanchette MG, Powers CM. The influence of heel height on patellofemoral joint kinetics during walking. Gait Posture. 2012;36(2):271–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Hyun S-H, Ryew C-C. Effect of lower limb kinetic on carrying infant by hip seat carrier during high heel gait. J Exerc Rehabil. 2018;14(6):1092–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  101. Kilby MC, Newell KM. Intra- and inter-foot coordination in quiet standing: footwear and posture effects. Gait Posture. 2012;35(3):511–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Lee HD, Kim JS. Acute changes in fascicle behavior and electromyographic activity of the medial gastrocnemius during walking in high heeled shoes. Korean J Sport Biomech. 2016;26(1):135–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  103. Lee S, Li JX. Effects of high-heeled shoes and asymmetrical load carrying on lower-extremity kinematics during walking in young women. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2014;104(1):58–65.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Mandato MG, Nester E. The effects of increasing heel height on forefoot peak pressure. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1999;89(2):75–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Massoud R. A type-2 fuzzy index to assess high heeled gait deviations using spatial-temporal parameters. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2022;25(2):193–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Melvin JMA, Price C, Preece S, Nester C, Howard D. An investigation into the effects of, and interaction between, heel height and shoe upper stiffness on plantar pressure and comfort. Footwear Sci. 2019;11(1):25–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Mika A, Oleksy T, Mika P, Marchewka A, Clark BC. The influence of heel height on lower extremity kinematics and leg muscle activity during gait in young and middle-aged women. Gait Posture. 2012;35(4):677–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Soares MM, Jacobs K, de Souza Moraes GF, Mendes DP, Papinni AA. Muscular activity in different locomotion plans with the use of various shoes types and barefoot. Work. 2012;41:2549–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  109. Owen E, Fatone S, Hansen A. Effect of walking in footwear with varying heel sole differentials on shank and foot segment kinematics. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2018;42(4):394–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Park S, Park H, Park J. Effect of heel base area and walking speed on the utilized coefficient of friction during high-heeled walking. Work. 2019;64(2):397–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Polomé E, Théveniau N, Vigier C, Dumas R, Robert T. Influence of different footwear on mediolateral stability during gait at different speeds in healthy people. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2020;23(SUPPL 1):S226–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  112. Pratihast M, Al-Ani A, Chai R, Su S, Naik G. Changes in lower limb muscle synchronisation during walking on high-heeled shoes. Healthc Technol Lett. 2018;5(6):236–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Rao S, Ripa R, Lightbourne K. Predictors of walking speed and stride length in high- and low-heeled footwear. Footwear Sci. 2013;5(3):179–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  114. Rezgui T, Ben Mansour K, Marin F. Friction coefficient analysis during high-heeled gait. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2015;18:2038–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Snow RE, Williams KR, Holmes GB Jr. The effects of wearing high heeled shoes on pedal pressure in women. Foot Ankle. 1992;13(2):85–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Stefanyshyn DJ, Nigg BM, Fisher V, O’Flynn B, Liu W. The influence of high heeled shoes on kinematics, kinetics, and muscle EMG of normal female gait. J Appl Biomech. 2000;16(3):309–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Sun D, Gu Y, Feng N. Comparison of plantar pressure distribution between different heel heights during incline treadmill walking. Int J Biomed Eng Tec. 2014;16(4):279–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  118. Truszczynska A, Trzaskoma Z, Stypinska Z, Drzal-Grabiec J, Tarnowski A. Is static balance affected by using shoes of different height? Biomed Hum Kinet. 2016;8(1):137–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  119. Velazquez JS, Iznaga-Benitez AM, Robau-Porrua A, Saez-Gutierrez FL, Cavas F. New affordable method for measuring angular variations caused by high heels on the sagittal plane of feet joints during Gait. Applied Sci. 2021;11(12):5605.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Wang Y, Pascoe DD, Kim CK, Xu D. Force patterns of heel strike and toe off on different heel heights in normal walking. Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22(6):486–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Wang C, Geng X, Wang S, Ma X, Wang X, Huang J, et al. The impact of high-heeled shoes on ankle complex during walking in young women-In vivo kinematic study based on 3D to 2D registration technique. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2016;28:7–16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Wang M, Gu Y, Baker JS. Analysis of foot kinematics wearing high heels using the Oxford foot model. Technol and Health Care. 2018;26(5):815–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  123. Wang M, Yan Z, Fekete G, Baker JS, Gu Y. The kinematics of the spine and lower limbs on sagittal plane in high-heeled gait. J Med Imag Health In. 2018;8(5):973–8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all authors of the primary studies included in this systematic review and meta- analysis.

Funding

The study was supported by Key Laboratory of Exercise and Health Sciences (Shanghai University of Sport), Ministry of Education (2002KF0005).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Exercise and Health Sciences (Shanghai University of Sport), Ministry of Education, Shanghai, China

    Ziwei Zeng, Yue Liu, Xiaoyue Hu, Pan Li & Lin Wang

Authors
  1. Ziwei Zeng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yue Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaoyue Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Pan Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lin Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

ZZ and LW designed the research. ZZ, YL and XH conducted the searches and screening process. PL, XH and LW assessed methodological quality. ZZ and YL extracted the data. ZZ performed the statistical analysis and ZZ and YL interpreted it. ZZ and YL wrote the manuscript with critical input from LW. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lin Wang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zeng, Z., Liu, Y., Hu, X. et al. Effects of high-heeled shoes on lower extremity biomechanics and balance in females: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health 23, 726 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15641-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15641-8

Keywords

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

Contact us