This review synthesizes ergonomic factors in footwear design, highlighting their impact on health and performance.
Background The foot's musculoskeletal function underpins gait and posture, making footwear a critical body-environment interface. Research across podiatry, orthopaedics, sports science, orthotics, and footwear design remains fragmented, necessitating a unified framework to advance ergonomic theory and practice. Objective This study aims to synthesize and present a unified framework of ergonomic considerations in footwear design by harmonizing interdisciplinary research from fields such as podiatry, sports science, orthopaedics, and ergonomics. It seeks to elucidate key thematic areas to advance the understanding and application of ergonomic principles for enhanced health, performance, and safety in footwear. Methods A comprehensive literature review and critical analysis were conducted across fields such as podiatry, orthopaedics, sports science, orthotics, footwear design and ergonomics, drawing from scholarly sources in databases including Web of Science Core Collection and Google Scholar. The analysis integrates findings across disciplines to develop a comprehensive taxonomy of ergonomic factors critical to footwear design. Results Six principal ergonomic factors are identified: Physiological, Physical, Cognitive, Organizational, Special Populations, and Innovation & Sustainability. The findings underscore the fact that ergonomically engineered footwear acts as a vital intervention for preventing injury, comfort and performances enhancement as well as promoting musculoskeletal well-being. Conclusions The findings provide footwear designers, engineers, and ergonomists with a structured, evidence-based framework to guide the development of products that effectively balance comfort, performance, and safety. Future research should address demographic biases, evaluate longitudinal outcomes, and examine implementation barriers to validate the framework across diverse populations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: