{"id":3437,"date":"2026-10-20T21:50:00","date_gmt":"2026-10-21T09:50:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/footworklab.net\/?p=3437"},"modified":"2026-10-20T21:50:00","modified_gmt":"2026-10-21T09:50:00","slug":"foot-analysis-report","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/footworklab.net\/fr\/news\/3437\/","title":{"rendered":"What Belongs in a Foot Analysis Report, and What Should Stay Out"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

About the author<\/strong> \u2014 FOOTWORK LAB is a manufacturer of foot assessment equipment and custom orthotic insoles, based in Ruichang, Jiangxi Province, China. Founded in 2014, with its own production plant since 2018. Certified to European Union and ISO quality system standards. See the factory<\/a> or view certification<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

A foot analysis report is the moment a measurement becomes a document, and documents have a way of acquiring authority they were never meant to carry.<\/strong> The recording is a set of observations. The report is a piece of writing that a client will take home, show to a partner, and possibly hand to another practitioner. What it says, and what it carefully does not say, decides whether the assessment helps or misleads.<\/p>\n

Most reports fail in one of two directions. Some are so thin that they describe nothing: a colour image, a logo and a recommendation. Others are so complete that they read like a verdict, with conclusions the measurement cannot support and language that a clinician would not use in person.<\/p>\n

We build the assessment systems that generate these reports, and we see how clinics use them. This article is about the content: the six parts a report should have, the four things that should never appear in one, and the practical question of who signs what.<\/p>\n

The report is a record, not a diagnosis<\/h2>\n

A report records what was measured, in what conditions, with what equipment. That is a limited and useful thing. It is not a clinical opinion, and it should not be written as one, because the recording does not contain the history, the examination or the reasoning that a clinical opinion requires.<\/p>\n

This distinction protects everyone. The clinic is protected because the document does not claim more than the equipment can support. The client is protected because they receive an accurate description rather than a label. The equipment supplier is protected because the system is not credited with judgement it does not have.<\/p>\n

In practice, the line is maintained by structure. If the report has a section for measurements and a separate section for interpretation, the reader can see which is which. If everything is mixed into a narrative, the boundary disappears and the whole document reads as a finding.<\/p>\n

Structure also makes the report reviewable. A colleague can check whether the interpretation follows from the measurements, which is impossible when the two are fused into one paragraph.<\/p>\n

The best reports we see are almost boring. They state conditions, present readings, note observations, and then say what the practitioner recommends, signed by a named person. Nothing in them would embarrass the practice in front of a regulator or a colleague.<\/p>\n

\"F2
FOOTWORK LAB F2 plantar pressure system. Product photography of our own output; specifications are confirmed in writing before an order.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Part one: the conditions<\/h2>\n

The first section should say when the recording was made, on what equipment, in what posture or activity, and with what footwear. These four facts determine whether any other part of the report can be compared with anything.<\/p>\n

Barefoot or shod is the most consequential of them. A pressure recording made in shoes describes the interface between foot, insole and shoe; one made barefoot describes the foot and the platform. They are not interchangeable, and a report that omits the distinction invites a comparison that means nothing.<\/p>\n

Static or dynamic is the second. A standing recording shows distribution under body weight; a walking recording shows a sequence, with timing and progression. Reading one as if it were the other is a common error, and a one-line statement in the report prevents it.<\/p>\n

The equipment identifier matters for a different reason. If a clinic has two systems, or replaces one, the record should say which produced the data, because sensors and calibration differ between units.<\/p>\n

Finally, note the operator. Not for blame, but because technique affects recordings, and knowing who captured a session helps when two sessions differ in a way the numbers do not explain.<\/p>\n

Part two: the measurements<\/h2>\n

Present the readings as measurements, with units and without adjectives. Peak pressure, contact area, timing, left-right difference: each is a number that can be checked, and each should appear in a form that a reader can compare with a later session.<\/p>\n

Keep the images honest. If the colour scale is adjusted for the individual foot, say so. A scale that changes between visits makes two images look comparable when they are not, and it is the most common source of false reassurance in a report.<\/p>\n

Where the software produces a summary, present it as a summary. An average across a walk is a useful single number and a poor description of a walk, and the report should make clear which one the reader is looking at.<\/p>\n

Avoid turning measurements into scores. A composite index feels authoritative and hides its inputs; a reader cannot tell which measurement moved, which is exactly what a follow-up needs to know.<\/p>\n

If something could not be measured reliably, say so. A recording with a poor capture, an unstable stance or a distracted client is still a record, and marking it as limited is more professional than presenting it as clean.<\/p>\n

Part three: observations<\/h2>\n

Observations are what the practitioner noticed, in language that distinguishes them from measurements. “The left heel contact appears brief on the recording” is an observation about the data. “The client shifts weight away from the left foot when standing” is an observation about behaviour.<\/p>\n

Both belong, in separate sentences. Mixing them produces a paragraph that reads as a finding when it is partly an impression, and impressions vary between practitioners in a way that measurements do not.<\/p>\n

Where a camera is used, note the camera position. A view from the front and a view from behind tell different stories, and a reader who does not know the angle cannot judge what they are looking at.<\/p>\n

Limit the number of observations. Three well-chosen ones are read; twelve are skimmed. The discipline of choosing is part of the professional work, and it is what distinguishes a report from a data dump.<\/p>\n

Where an observation is uncertain, mark it. “Possible” and “appears” are honest words, and they protect the practice when a later assessment tells a different story.<\/p>\n

\"F2
FOOTWORK LAB F2 plantar pressure system. Product photography of our own output; specifications are confirmed in writing before an order.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Part four: interpretation, signed<\/h2>\n

Interpretation is the practitioner’s sentence, and it should be visibly theirs. A named signature, a role and a date are enough. What matters is that the reader can see where the measurement stops and the professional begins.<\/p>\n

The interpretation should refer back to the measurements explicitly. Not “the foot is pronated” but “the medial loading shown in the recording, together with the visible position of the knee, suggests a pattern worth reviewing”. That sentence can be checked against the report; the first cannot.<\/p>\n

It should also state its own limits. An assessment recording describes one session. It does not predict how a client will respond to a device, and it does not establish anything about the cause of a complaint.<\/p>\n

Where the practitioner recommends an action, the recommendation should be separable from the interpretation. A client may decline the recommendation and still benefit from the assessment, and the document should allow that.<\/p>\n

Finally, keep the tone consistent with the conversation in the room. A report that is more alarming than the appointment creates a phone call; one that is more reassuring creates a complaint. The document and the conversation should be the same event in two forms.<\/p>\n

Part five: the plan and the review<\/h2>\n

A report without a next step is an artefact. Even “no action proposed, review in twelve months” is a plan, and writing it down gives the client something to hold and the clinic something to schedule.<\/p>\n

Where a device is being made, the plan should reference the specification: build family, materials, cover, and the shoe it is intended for. That line turns the report into a production input, which is where its practical value begins.<\/p>\n

Set the review interval explicitly. A date in the report is more likely to produce a return visit than a verbal suggestion, and a return visit is where the comparison value of the recording is realised.<\/p>\n

Keep the plan short. Three items is a plan; a page of recommendations is a wish list that the client will not follow and the clinic will not track.<\/p>\n

If the plan depends on something outside the clinic, say so. A device that needs a particular shoe, or a review that needs a GP referral, should be stated in the document rather than assumed in the conversation.<\/p>\n

Part six: the file copy<\/h2>\n

The copy that stays in the clinic should be complete, and the copy that goes to the client should be appropriate. Those are not the same document, and practices that send the clinical file to the client often regret it.<\/p>\n

Keep the raw data, the images and the specification in the file. Send the client a version with the measurements, the observations in plain language, the plan and the review date. Both documents should carry the same date and the same signature.<\/p>\n

Name files consistently. A folder of recordings called “scan1” and “client” is a folder that will be unusable in a year, and the naming convention costs nothing to establish.<\/p>\n

Export a copy that does not depend on the software. Formats change, licences expire, and a PDF of the report with the key images is a durable record in a way that a proprietary file is not.<\/p>\n

Then decide the retention period and write it into the practice policy. Six months or six years is a local decision, but “as long as the software keeps it” is not a policy.<\/p>\n

\"F2
FOOTWORK LAB F2 plantar pressure system. Product photography of our own output; specifications are confirmed in writing before an order.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

What should never appear in a report<\/h2>\n

First, a diagnosis in the guise of a measurement. Statements about conditions, causes or prognosis belong to a clinical opinion, not to a recording, and putting them in a generated report transfers a claim to a system that cannot support it.<\/p>\n

Second, promises. A report that says a device will change how a client walks is making a claim the clinic cannot control, and it will be remembered if the outcome is unremarkable.<\/p>\n

Third, comparisons with other clients. “Better than average” or “worse than typical” invites questions the recording cannot answer, especially where the reference population is undefined.<\/p>\n

Fourth, anything the practice would not say aloud. If a sentence would be uncomfortable to read out in the appointment, it does not belong in the document.<\/p>\n

We do not put any of these in the reports our software generates, and we recommend clinics check their templates against the same list, because a template is a policy whether or not anyone wrote it down.<\/p>\n

Who reads it, and what they need<\/h2>\n

Three audiences read the same report: the client, the practitioner who wrote it, and a colleague who inherits the case. Each wants something different, and a good report serves all three without contradicting itself.<\/p>\n

The client wants plain language and a plan. The author wants the measurements in a form that supports a comparison next year. The colleague wants the conditions and the reasoning, because they were not in the room.<\/p>\n

A structure with sections does this naturally. A narrative does not, which is why the template matters more than the prose style.<\/p>\n

Where a report is shared with another professional, add a short covering note about the conditions. The note is often more useful than the report itself, because it tells the reader what kind of evidence they are looking at.<\/p>\n

And where a report is used for a commercial purpose, such as a device order, keep the commercial language out of the clinical section. An order sheet and an assessment report are different documents, and mixing them weakens both.<\/p>\n

Improving the template over time<\/h2>\n

Review the template annually against the reports actually produced. Fields that are never filled in should be removed; fields that are always filled in by hand should be automated or deleted.<\/p>\n

Ask two colleagues to read a report and tell you what it says. If their summaries differ materially, the template is ambiguous, and the ambiguity will be resolved differently by each practitioner.<\/p>\n

Keep a small library of anonymised examples: one straightforward, one limited by conditions, one with an unusual finding. New staff learn faster from three real examples than from a style guide.<\/p>\n

Finally, keep the report as part of the clinical service rather than as an output of the equipment. Practices that spend an hour on the template produce documents that clients keep; practices that accept the default produce documents that end up in a drawer.<\/p>\n

\n

Frequently asked questions<\/h2>\n

Should the report contain a diagnosis?<\/h3>\n

No. It contains measurements, observations and the practitioner’s interpretation. Diagnosis requires history, examination and clinical reasoning that an assessment recording does not provide.<\/p>\n

Can we customize the report template?<\/h3>\n

Ask about the configuration of the model you are considering. Report templates vary between systems, and the ability to set your own wording is worth confirming before purchase.<\/p>\n

How long should we keep the recordings?<\/h3>\n

Follow local requirements and practice policy. A practical approach is to keep the exported report and key images indefinitely, and the raw data for the period your professional body recommends.<\/p>\n

What should be left out of the client copy?<\/h3>\n

Internal notes, speculative observations and anything the practice would not say in the room. The client copy should contain the measurements, the plain-language observations, the plan and the review date.<\/p>\n

Do your systems generate the report automatically?<\/h3>\n

The software assembles the session data, images and regional readings. The interpretation is written by the practitioner, and the report keeps the two sections separate.<\/p>\n

Is a pressure recording enough for a report?<\/h3>\n

It is enough for a description of load distribution in the conditions recorded. Whether it is enough for a particular clinical question is a professional judgement, not a product feature.<\/p>\n

Can we add our own logo and letterhead?<\/h3>\n

Ask during configuration. Most clinics want their own branding on the document, and the practical question is whether the template allows it without breaking the layout.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

What we would do next<\/h2>\n

Take your current report and mark which sentences are measurement, which are observation and which are interpretation. If the three cannot be separated, the template is doing the mixing. The product overview<\/a> covers the assessment range, the FAQ page<\/a> answers commercial questions, and our article on reading a plantar pressure map<\/a> explains the measurements a report should carry.<\/p>\n

This article is intended for professional and educational reference. It is not medical advice. Foot assessment equipment produces measurements and images; clinical interpretation and any decision about care remain the responsibility of a qualified professional. Certification scope is limited to the documentation we hold: European Union certification and ISO quality system certification.<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

Related reading<\/h2>\n