Importance of Sock Type in the Development of Foot Lesions on Low-difficulty, Short Hikes
Phase: NA
Conditions: Skin Lesion
Sponsor: University of Extremadura

Date: April 9, 2019 
 
Title: Importance of Sock Type in the Development of Foot Lesions on Low-difficulty, Short 
Hikes. 
Description of document: Materials and Methods (Study Protocol: description of the clinical 
study, including objective and design. Statistical Analysis Plan (description of the statistical 
considerations for analyzing the data collected in the study.) results of the study (Results obtained 
in the study) and Supplementary data (protocol of measures and other tables). 
 
 

 
 
Materials and Methods 
1. Permission and participants 
All participants signed an informed consent form, and permission for the study was obtained 
from the Bioethics Committee (reference 126/2016). The admission criteria were: be of legal age, have 
no current health problems that would hinder or prevent participation in the hike, and carry a 
backpack weighing less than 3 kg. Participants were asked to use specific hiking footwear (light, 
flexible, soft-soled, with good grip and breathable material) (low top hiking shoes), based on 
earlier studies [38-40]. They were also asked to do the entire hike following the instructions of an 
experienced guide and to not remove their footwear or socks before examination by a podiatrist. 
2. Sock type and interventions performed 
Socks were of two types: technical socks, designed for high performance sports use (Lurbel 
brand, models Tierra and Set), and non-technical socks for everyday use. The socks had different 
composition: Tierra (50% regeneractiv, 25% cool-teak, 17% polyamide ions, 8% lycra); Set (75% 
cotton, 17% polyamide, 8% lycra) and cotton (98% cotton, 2% elastane). The technical socks had 
reinforced weave in the toe, metatarsal and heel areas.  
Participants were examined by trained podiatrists on three occasions to measure the study 
variables: at the start of the walk (km 0), at the end of the asphalt section (half way; km 14.5) and 
at the end (km 29.6). The protocol of measures was followed (supplementary data). 
3. Study design, route description and participants 
A clinical trial randomized, double blinded was designed to analyze the influence of 
different types of socks (technical and non-technical) on the appearance of foot injuries after a 
low-difficulty, short-term sport activity. The study follow the CONSORT criteria.  
To carry out the study, the hiker was previously registered. The researchers contacted the 
participants to explain the study. In addition, data on age, sex, foot number and associated 
diseases that prevented the completion of the route were obtained. One hour before starting the 
route, researchers who did not intervene in the exploration process, made registration and 
delivery to each hiker of two technical socks (1 Set and 1 Tierra) appropriate to the size of the foot 
and randomly for the right foot (RF) and left foot (LF). Likewise, it proceeded for non-technical 
socks (cotton), but in this case both feet wore the same type of sock. All the participants before 
the initial exploration had their socks put on for half an hour. The hike was low-difficulty, over a 
short distance [37]. The first 14.5 km were on asphalt and the last 15.1 km on dirt. The height 
range was 189 m and the pace was moderate, at 5 km/hour. The sample comprised 109 
participants (53 men and 56 women). Two women had to give up the hike for personal reasons. 
Both wore technical socks. 
The Table 1 explain the anthropometric characteristics of the participants and the 
distribution of the socks, differentiating by sex and feet.  
Table 1. Anthropometric variables, total sock distribution and sock distribution by gender. 
Anthropometric variable 
Total  
Male  
Female  
Gender 
 
48.6% 
51.4% 
Age (years) 
44± 25 
49± 21 
36± 24 
Height (meters) 
1.7± 0.1 
1.7± 0.1 
1.6± 0.1 
Weight (kg) 
68.8±19.4 
81.0±13.5 
61.4±7.8 

BMI 
24.9± 3.6 
26.6± 3.7 
23.5± 9.1 
Sock type distribution 
Total % 
Male % 
Female % 
LF sock 
Tierra 
40.4 (n=44) 
35.8 (n=19) 
44.6 (n=25) 
Set 
29.4 (n=32) 
35.8 (n=19) 
23.3 (n=13) 
Cotton 
30.2 (n=33) 
28.4 (n=15) 
32.1 (n=18) 
RF sock 
Tierra 
29.4 (n=32) 
35.8 (n=19) 
23.3 (n=13) 
Set 
40.4 (n=44) 
35.8 (n=19) 
44.6 (n=25) 
Cotton 
30.2 (n=33) 
28.4 (n=15) 
32.1 (n=18) 
Km=Kilometres, n=sample size, %=Percentage, ±=Standard deviation, kg=Kilogrammes, 
BMI=Body mass index, LF=Left foot, RF=Right foot. 
4. Study variables  
The qualitative variables analysed were: gender, body mass index (BMI) by rank, sock type, 
dermal lesions (all lesions developed during the hike, both keratopathies with keratinisation 
disorder and dermatopathies without keratinisation disorder), muscle lesions (all lesions 
developed during the hike) and nail lesions (all nail lesions developed during the hike, both 
traumatic and non-traumatic onychopathies). The height and weight data obtained were used to 
calculate BMI by rank, interpreted according to the World Health Organization classification [41] 
(Table 2). 
Table 2. Qualitative variables and categories. BMI= Body mass index. 
Qualitative 
variable 
Category 
Gender 
Male 
Female 
BMI 
Underweight (<18.5) Normal weight (18.5-24.99) 
Overweight (25.0-29.9) 
Obese (>30) 
Sock type 
Technical (Tierra)  
Technical (Set) 
Non-technical (Cotton) 
Skin lesion 
Blister 
Injury (Erosion & chafing) 
Reddened skin 
Urticaria Crevice 
Heloma 
Muscle lesion 
Pain due inadequate warm 
Inflammation 
Muscle discomfort
Sprain 
 
 
Nail lesion 
Onychocryptosis 
Subungueal hematoma 
 
 
 
 
The quantitative variables analysed were: age, body mass index (BMI), temperature of each 
foot measured in two aspects (plantar and dorsal), and perimeter of each foot, measured in four 
areas (dorsal aspect of toes, instep, heel, tibia).  
5. Measuring instruments  
The height range and the pace hikers was controlled with a Garmin ETREX 20X GPS (Global 
Positioning System). Perimeter was measured with a flexible, non-elastic tape measure (Lawton 
18-0160, precision 1 mm). Weight was measured using scales (Tanita UM-076, precision 0.1kg) 
and height was measured using the weight rod of different scales (SECA 704, precision 1 mm).  
Temperatures were taken with an infrared thermometer (FTN Medisana, precision 0.18º C), 
calculating the mean of the three measurements. An intra rate of the measure was done to detect 
the error of the measure of the temperature, obtaining an error of 0.1452. 
6. Statistical tests 
The data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 22.0 (IBM, Armonk, 
New York). The statistical treatment consisted of data study and cleansing, descriptive variable 
analysis, normality test (Shapiro-Wilks test). The studies of normality were no significant (p-
values between 0.000 y 0.044). 
Quantitative variables depending on whether the samples were paired or independent, 
Friedman's test for related samples and Kruskal-Wallis was performed for independent samples, 
both with Bonferroni correction for multiple testing was applied. For the qualitative variables the 

chi-square or Fisher's exact test with a significance level of α = 0.05 was carried out. The variables 
analysed by logistic regression were quantified using the ODDS Ratio (OR). The effect size for 
the different variables was also calculated. First, for Kruskall-Wallis tests, the variation was 
between 0.443 y 0.888, and for Friedman tests, the variation was between 0.336 y 0.623. Therefore, 
in both cases the effect size could be considered median and high. 
All p-values = 0.000 are less than 1 per 1000. 
Results 
After completing the first part of the hike, the most frequent dermal lesions among 
participants were blisters and erosions.  
Table 3. Prevalence of skin, muscle and nail lesions during the 0-14.5 km of the hike by sex.  
(0-14.5 km) 
Female  
Male  
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Skin lesion 
%Tt.  RF 
LF  
RF  LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
Blister 
12.8 
0.0 
4.0 
8.0 
7.7 
22.2 
27.8 
0.0 
5.3 
5.3 
0.0 
6.7 
13.3 
Erosion 
2.8 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
11.1 
5.6 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.7 
0.0 
(0-14.5 km) 
Female  
Male  
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Muscle lesion 
%Tt.  RF  
LF  
RF  LF  
RF 
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
Pain due inadequate 
warm 
21.1 
23.1 
27.8 
8.0 
7.7 
27.8 
27.8 
10.5 
15.8 
10.5 
0.0 
13.3 
13.3 
Inflammation  
2.8 
0.0 
4.2 
4.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
10.5 
10.5 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
Muscle discomfort 
1.8 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.00 
0.0 
0.0 
5.3 
5.3 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Km=Kilometres, %=Percentage, Tt=Total, RF=Right foot, LF=Left foot. 
None of the other dermal lesions included in the evaluation (reddened skin, urticaria, crevice 
and heloma) were detected. Significant differences were found between the percentage of dermal 
lesions in hikers wearing technical socks (6.6%) and non-technical socks (36.4%) (p-value=0.000). 
The women had a higher percentage of dermal lesions (23.2%) than the men (7.5%) (p-
value=0.034), regardless of sock type. Moreover, the percentage of women with dermal lesions 
was significantly higher among wearers of non-technical socks (50%) than in wearers of technical 
socks (10.5% had lesion) (p-value=0.002). Particularly the women presented more blisters in both 
RF and LF when they wore cotton sock compared to the Tierra and Set socks (RF p-value = 0.050, 
LF p-value = 0.042). In the case of men, there was no difference in any of the skin lesions at 14.5 
km on any foot compared to the sock used (Table 3). The most frequent muscle lesions at the end 
of the first part of the hike were pain due inadequate warm (21.1%), inflammation (2.8%) and 
muscle discomfort (1.8%). No sprains or nail disorders were detected at the end of the first part 
of the hike. No difference between any of muscle lesions analyzed and technical and non-
technical socks were found. By sex, no differences were found regarding technical and non-
technical socks or concerning the model used sock on each foot (Table 3). 
Table 4. Prevalence of skin, muscle and nail lesions during the 14.5-29.6 km of the hike by sex. 
(14.5-29.6 km) 
Female  
Male  
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Skin lesion 
%Tt.  RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  LF  
RF  
LF  
Blister 
19.6 
7.7 
12.0 
20.0 
7.7 
25.0 
12.5 
5.3 
0.0 
5.3 
21.1 
6.7 
0.0 
Erosion  
7.5 
0.0 
4.0 
8.0 
0.0 
12.5 
18.8 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
20.0 
13.3 
Reddened skin 
3.7 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
18.8 
18.8 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.7 
6.7 
Urticaria 
0.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.3 
6.3 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
Crevice 
0.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.7 
0.0 
Heloma 
0.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.7 
6.7 
(14.5-29.6 km) 
Female  
Male  

Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Muscle lesion 
%Tt.  RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  LF  
RF  
LF  
Pain due inadequate 
warm 
11.2 
15.4 
4.0 
4.0 
7.7 
0.0 
12.5 
10.5 
0.0 
5.3 
10.5 
0.0 
0.0 
Inflammation  
0.9 
0.0 
4.0 
4.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
Muscle discomfort 
0.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
5.3 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
Sprain 
0.9 
0.0 
0.0 
4.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
(14.5-29.6 km) 
Female  
Male  
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Tierra % 
Set % 
Cotton % 
Nail lesion 
%Tt.  RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  
LF  
RF  LF  
RF  
LF  
Onychocryptosis 
0.9 
7.7 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
Subungual hematoma 
1.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.3 
6.3 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.7 
6.7 
Km=Kilometres, %=Percentage, Tt=Total, RF=Right foot, LF=Left foot. 
In the second part of the hike, a greater variety of dermal lesions was detected. The most 
prevalent were blisters, erosions and reddened skin. Again, no urticaria, reddened skin, crevices, 
or helomas were detected with either technical sock. Differences were found between the 
percentage of dermal lesions among hikers wearing technical socks (21.1%) or non-technical socks 
(54.8%) (p-value=0. 001). By gender, the percentage of women and men with dermal lesions was 
higher among wears of non-technical socks (women 68.8% and men 40%) than among wearers of 
technical socks (women 26.3% and men 15.8%) but the differences only were significant in women 
(p-value=0.006). Considering the sock used in each foot, in the case of women, presented more 
reddened skin in both RF and LF if they used cotton sock compared to the Tierra and Set (RF and 
LF p-values=0.023). In the case of men, they presented more blisters in the LF if they used Set sock 
than cotton or Tierra (p-value=0.021) and more erosion in the RF if they used cotton sock in 
comparison with the Tierra or Set (p-value=0.018) (Table 4). A greater variety of total muscle 
lesions was also detected in the second part of the hike: pain due to inadequate warm, 
inflammation, muscle discomfort and sprain. No differences were found between any of the 
muscular injuries analysed and the technical and non-technical socks neither by sex (Table 4). 
Nail lesions like onychocryptosis (0.9%) and subungual hematomas (1.9%) were 
infrequently and developed only in the second part of the hike. No difference between any of the 
nail lesions analyzed and technical and non-technical socks were found. By sex, no differences 
were found (Table 4).  
The temperature comparisons between technical and non-technical socks, regardless of 
distance, foot, measurement area and sex, showed significant differences. The Friedman test was 
performed (p value <0.005) for the comparisons between paired samples and the Kruskal-Wallis 
test was performed (p value <0.009) for independent samples. (Supplementary data, tables A, B). 
The differences in temperature are greater at the beginning of the hike than at the end. An 
increase in temperature from 0 km to 14.5 km was observed, and temperature stabilization of 14.5 
km to 29.6 km in all types of socks. However, the increase in temperature, from the beginning to 
the end of the hike, varies between the types of socks in all the areas measured at the foot of the 
walkers; being superior when using non-technical socks (about 8.5°C) than in the case of using 
technical socks (about 1.2°C) (Supplementary data, tables A, B). 
Table 5. Women’s foot temperature by sock type. 
FEMALE  
Distance 
(km) 
Sock  
P-value sock 
P-value distance 
T 
S 
C  
T-S 
T-C 
S-C 
T 
S 
C 
Dorsal temp (ºC) RF 
0 
34.7 
35.0 
19.9 
 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.002* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.001* 
14.5 
36.2 
36.3 
31.8 
 
1.000 
0.013* 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.3 
36.3 
30.6 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=1.000 
(3)=1.000 
(3)=0.867 
Dorsal temp (ºC) LF 
0  
35.0 
35.0 
19.9 
 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.005* 
(1)=0.003* 

14.5 
36.4 
36.2 
32.2 
 
0.931 
0.002* 
0.036* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.001* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.3 
36.3 
30.8 
 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=1.000 
(3)=1.000 
(3)=0.472 
Plantar temp (ºC) RF 
0 
34.8 
34.8 
20.5 
 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.007* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.0 
36.2 
29.7 
 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(2)=0.001* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.2 
36.2 
30.6 
 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=1.000 
(3)=1.000 
(3)=1.000 
Plantar temp (ºC) LF 
0 
34.8 
34.9 
21.0 
 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.002* 
(1)=0.009* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.2 
36.0 
30.2 
 
0.287 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.1 
36.0 
30.2 
 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=0.420 
(3)=0.785 
(3)=1.000 
Km=Kilometres, T=Tierra, S=Set, C=Cotton, Temp=Temperature, (ºC)=Degrees centigrade, 
RF=Right foot, LF=Left foot, (*)=Significant difference, (1)= Distance between 0-14.5 Km, (2)= 
Distance between 0-29.6 Km, (3)= Distance between 14.5-29.6 Km. 
By gender, no significant differences were detected between technical socks models nor in 
women (p-values> 0.287) nor in men (p-values> 0.249). However, significant differences were 
detected between each model of technical socks and the non-technical sock for all distances and 
areas of the feet measured (Tierra-Cotton p-values<0.013 in women and p-value<0.036 in men) 
and (Set-Cotton p-values<0.036 in women and p-value <0.014 in men). Regarding the distance in 
both men and women, differences were observed from the beginning to the end and from the 
beginning to the middle route with all the models. In addition, in the case of men the tendency is 
observed in the plant of both feet to increase the temperature from the middle to the end of the 
hike (LF p-value=0.056, RF p-value=0.091) although it cannot be considered statistical significance 
(tables 5 and 6). 
Table 6. Men’s foot temperature by sock type. 
MALE  
Distanc
e 
(km) 
Sock 
P-value sock 
P-value distance 
T 
S 
C  
T-S 
T-C 
S-C 
T 
S 
C 
Dorsal temp (ºC) RF 
0 
34.
9 
35.1 
22.0 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.005
* 
(1)=0.017
* 
(1)=0.003* 
14.5 
35.
9 
36.1 
32.9 
1.000 
0.030* 
0.014* 
(2)=0.000
* 
(2)=0.000
* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.
3 
36.4 
30.0 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=0.470 
(3)=0.223 
(3)=0.896 
Dorsal temp (ºC) LF 
0  
35.
2 
35.3 
21.4 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.008
* 
(1)=0.240 
(1)=0.003* 
14.5 
36.
3 
36.0 
32.5 
0.931 
0.036* 
0.002* 
(2)=0.000
* 
(2)=0.003
* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.
5 
36.4 
30.8 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=0.128 
(3)=0.401 
(3)=0.558 
Plantar temp (ºC) RF 
0 
34.
9 
35.1 
22.0 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.011
* 
(1)=0.017
* 
(1)=0.004* 
14.5 
35.
8 
36.4 
30.3 
0.249 
0.007* 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000
* 
(2)=0.000
* 
(2)=0.001* 
29.6 
36.
2 
36.4 
29.0 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=0.091 
(3)=0.223 
(3)=1.000 
Plantar temp (ºC) LF 
0 
35.
0 
34.9 
21.8 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.006
* 
(1)=0.001
* 
(1)=0.042* 

14.5 
36.
1 
35.7 
31.2 
0.287 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000
* 
(2)=0.000
* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.
4 
36.2 
29.3 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=0.056 
(3)=0.401 
(3)=0.558 
Km=Kilometres, T=Tierra, S=Set, C=Cotton, Dif.=Difference Temp=Temperature, (ºC)=Degrees 
centigrade, RF=Right foot, LF=Left foot, (*)=Significant difference, (1)= Distance between 0-14.5 
Km, (2)= Distance between 0-29.6 Km, (3)= Distance between 14.5-29.6 Km. 
The study of the perimeter of hikers’ feet analysed in total and by gender, in relation to 
distance and sock type, did not reveal significant results (data not shown).  
Table 7. Probability of suffering skin and muscle lesions in relation to anthropometric variables 
and sock type throughout the hike. 
km=Kilometre, %= Percentages, BMI=Body mass index. 
It was possible to study the relation between variables and predict the probability of lesions 
developing during the hike using logistic regression analysis (Table 7). Women have a higher 
probability than men of suffering skin lesions in hikes of up to 14.5 km. However, men have a 
higher probability than women of suffering skin lesions on hikes of 14.5 to 29.6 km and muscle 
lesions on hikes of up to 14.5 km.  
The non-technical socks showed the highest probability of wearers suffering dermal and 
muscle lesions, both from 0-14.5 km and from 14.5 km to the end of the hike. The probability of 
dermal and muscle lesions developing in relation to the quantitative variables showed direct and 
inverse relations. From 0-14.5 km, the BMI and age of hikers are directly and inversely related, 
respectively, both in dermal and in muscle lesions. In the second part of the hike, age continued 
to show an inverse relation with skin lesions, but no relation with BMI was identified (Table 7). 
 
 
PROBABILITY SKIN LESIONS 
PROBABILITY MUSCLE LESIONS 
Distance:  
Distance: 14.5-29.6 Km 
Distance: 0-14.5 Km 
96% If female 
90% If male 
100% If male 
100% If non-technical sock 
100% If non-technical sock 
67% If non-technical sock 
Direct relation 
Inverse relation 
Inverse relation 
Direct relation 
Inverse relation 
BMI 
Age 
Age 
BMI 
Age 

 
Supplementary data 
Protocol of Measures. Top shows the protocol of measure at the starting point (0 km). Middle part includes the protocol of the first part of 
the hike (0-14.5 km) and lower part of the table reflex the measurement protocol of the second part of the hike (14.5-29.6 km) 
PROTOCOL OF MEASURES 
STARTING POINT (0 Km) 
Dorsal Number:……………………………..Gender:…………………..Foot size:………………… Weight………Size…….….. 
Body mass index (BMI):…………….. 
Nº 
Bag 
with 
Socks:…………………………. 
Previous 
Alterations 
on 
skin, 
muscles 
or 
nails...................................................................... 
Temperature RF                                                                Temperature LF 
Plantar 
 
 
 
Plantar 
 
 
 
Dorsal 
 
 
 
Dorsal 
 
 
 
Perimeters RF: (Three different measures)                                              Perimeters LF: (Three different measures)                            
 
 
 
FIRST PART OF THE HIKE (0-14.5 Km) 
Temperature RF: (Three different measures)       
Plantar 
 
 
 
Dorsal 
 
 
 
Temperature LF: (Three different measures)                        
Plantar 
 
 
 
Dorsal 
 
 
 
 
 
 
LESIONS (0-14.5KM) 
SKIN LESIONS (SPECIFY RF AND LF) 
Hyperkeratosis ……………… Heloma............... 
Blister ………….Erosion……… Reeddned skin………….  
Urticaria……..Grevice…………….. Others…………………
 
MUSCLE LESIONS (SPECIFY RF AND LF) 
Pain due inadequate warm …………Inflamation..…… 
Muscle discomfort………… Sprain…… Others …...............
 
NAIL LESIONS (SPECIFY RF AND LF) 
Onichocryptosis ………….subungual hematoma………. 
Others…………………………………………… 
 
Perimeters RF: (Three different measures)                                         
 
 
 
Perimeters LF: (Three different measures)                                         
 
 
EXTRA DETAILS 
 
 
 
 
tibia 
tibia 
toes 
toes 
hell 
hell 
instep 
instep 
tibia 
hell 
instep 
instep 
tibia 
hell 
toes 
toes 

 
SECOND PART OF THE HIKE (14.5-29.6 Km) 
Temperature RF: (Three different measures)       
                                                                             
Plantar 
 
 
 
Dorsal 
 
 
 
 
Temperature LF: (Three different measures)                           
 
Plantar 
 
 
 
Dorsal 
 
 
 
 
LESIONS (14.5-29.6 Km)  
SKIN LESIONS (SPECIFY RF AND LF) 
Hyperkeratosis 
……………… 
Heloma...............Blister 
………….Erosion………Reeddned 
skin………….  
Urticaria 
Grevice……………..Others…………………………………..
……….. 
 
MUSCLE LESIONS (SPECIFY RF AND LF) 
Pain due inadequate warm …………Inflamation..…… 
Muscle discomfort………… Sprain…… Others…………... 
 
NAIL LESIONS (SPECIFY RF AND LF) 
Onichocryptosis ………….subungual hematoma ………. 
Others…………………………………………………………
… 
 Perimeters RF: (Three different measures)                                        
 
 
 
 
 
Perimeters LF: (Three different measures)                                         
 
EXTRA DETAILS 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
instep 
instep 
tibia 
tibia 
hell 
hell 
toes 
toes 

Table A. Foot temperature by sock type (technical/non-technical). 
Distance 
(km) 
Socks 
P-value socks 
P-value distance 
T  
NT  
T-NT 
T  
NT  
Dorsal temp (ºC) RF 
0 
35.0 
20.7 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.2 
32.3 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.3 
30.4 
0.000* 
(3)=0.101  
(3)=0.413 
Dorsal temp (ºC) LF 
0  
35.2 
20.6 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.2 
32.4 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.4 
30.8 
0.000* 
(3)=0.101 
(3)=0.053 
Plantar temp (ºC)  RF 
0 
34.9 
21.2 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.0 
30.0 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.2 
29.8 
0.000* 
(3)=0.091 
(3)=0.847 
Plantar temp (ºC) LF 
0 
34.9 
21.3 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.0 
30.6 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.2 
29.8 
0.000* 
(3)=0.340 
(3)=0.736 
T=Technical, NT=Non-Technical, Km=Kilometres, Temp=Temperature, (ºC)=Degrees centigrade (*)=Significant 
difference, RF=Right foot, LF=Left foot, (1)= Distance between 0-14.5 Km, (2)=Distance between 0-29.6 Km, (3)= between 
14.5-29.6 Km. 
 
 

 
Table B. Foot temperature by sock composition. 
Distance (km) 
Sock 
P-value  
P-value distance 
T 
S 
C  
T-S 
T-C 
S-C 
T 
S 
C 
Dorsal temp (ºC) RF 
0 
34.9 
35.1 
21.2  
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.1 
36.2 
32.3 
1.000  
0.000* 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.3 
36.4 
30.4 
1.000  
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=0.526 
(3)=0.305 
(3)=0.413 
Dorsal temp (ºC) LF 
0  
35.1 
35.2 
20.6  
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.002* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.3 
36.1 
32.4  
0.417 
0.000* 
0.001* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.00* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.4 
36.4 
30.8  
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=0.341 
(3)=0.467 
(3)=0.158 
Plantar temp (ºC) RF 
0 
34.9 
35.0 
21.2 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
35.7 
36.1 
30.0 
0.228 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.2 
36.3 
29.9 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=0.826 
(3)=0.826 
(3)=1.000 
Plantar temp (ºC) LF 
0 
34.9 
34.9 
21.3 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
(1)=0.000* 
14.5 
36.2 
35.8 
30.6 
0.105 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
(2)=0.000* 
29.6 
36.2 
36.1 
29.8 
1.000 
0.000* 
0.000* 
(3)=1.000 
(3)=0.184 
(3)=0.736 
Km=Kilometres, T=Tierra, S=Set, C=Cotton, temp=Temperature, (ºC)=Degrees centigrade, RF=Right foot, LF=Left foot, 
(*)=Significant difference, (1)= Distance between 0-14.5 Km, (2)= Distance between 0-29.6 Km, (3)= Distance between 14.5-
29.6 Km.