Literature DB >> 26394639

Does Strict Adherence to the Ponseti Method Improve Isolated Clubfoot Treatment Outcomes? A Two-institution Review.

Nancy H Miller1, Patrick M Carry2, Bryan J Mark2, Glenn H Engelman2, Gaia Georgopoulos2, Sue Graham2, Matthew B Dobbs3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite being recognized as the gold standard in isolated clubfoot treatment, the Ponseti casting method has yielded variable results. Few studies have directly compared common predictors of treatment failure between institutions with high versus low failure rates. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked: (1) is the provider's rigid adherence to the Ponseti method associated with a lower likelihood of unplanned clubfoot surgery, and (2) at the institution that did not adhere rigidly to Ponseti's principles, are any demographic or treatment-related factors associated with increased likelihood of unplanned clubfoot surgery?
METHODS: After institutional review board approval, a consecutive series of patients with a diagnosis of isolated clubfoot who underwent treatment between January 2003 and December 2007 were identified. At Institution 1, 91 of 133 patients met the eligibility criteria and were followed for a minimum of 2 years compared with 58 of 58 patients at Institution 2. At Institution 1, 16 providers managed care using a conservative casting approach based on the Ponseti method. However, treatment was adapted by the provider(s). At Institution 2, one orthopaedic surgeon managed care with strict adherence to the Ponseti method. Surgical indications at both institutions included the presence of a persistent equinovarus foot position while standing. A chart review was used to collect data related to proportion of patients undergoing unplanned additional treatment for deformity recurrences after Ponseti casting, demographics, and treatment patterns.
RESULTS: The proportion of subjects who underwent unplanned major surgical intervention was greater (odds ratio [OR], 51.1; 95% CI, 6.8-384.0; p < 0.001) at Institution 1 (60 of 131, 47%) compared with Institution 2 (two of 91, 2%). There was no difference (p = 0.200) in the proportion of patients who underwent additional casting, repeat tendo Achilles lengthening, and/or anterior tibialis tendon transfer only (minor recurrence) at Institution 1 (nine of 131, 7%) compared with Institution 2 (11 of 91, 13%). At Institution 1, an increase in the number of revision casts (multiple vs no casts, hazard ratio [HR] = 3.9; 95% CI, 2.0-7.6; p < 0.001) and an increase in the number of cast-related complications (multiple vs no complications, HR = 2.8; 95% CI, 1.2-6.7; p = 0.019) were associated with increased risk of major surgery in the multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSIONS: Rigid commitment to the Ponseti method in the conservative treatment of patients with isolated clubfoot was associated with a lower risk of subsequent unplanned surgical intervention. In addition, clubfoot treatment programs that use a care model that prioritizes continuity in care and dedication to the Ponseti method may decrease the proportion of patients who undergo unplanned surgical intervention. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26394639      PMCID: PMC4686485          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-015-4559-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  30 in total

Review 1.  Treatment of congenital club foot.

Authors:  I V Ponseti
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 2.  Update on clubfoot: etiology and treatment.

Authors:  Matthew B Dobbs; Christina A Gurnett
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-02-18       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Classification of clubfoot.

Authors:  A Diméglio; H Bensahel; P Souchet; P Mazeau; F Bonnet
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop B       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.041

4.  Deformity and disability from treated clubfoot.

Authors:  J Aronson; C L Puskarich
Journal:  J Pediatr Orthop       Date:  1990 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.324

5.  Treatment and prognosis in congenital club foot.

Authors:  A J Harrold; C J Walker
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1983-01

6.  What proportion of patients need extensive surgery after failure of the Ponseti technique for clubfoot?

Authors:  R Baxter Willis; Mazen Al-Hunaishel; Luis Guerra; Ken Kontio
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Long-term comparative results in patients with congenital clubfoot treated with two different protocols.

Authors:  E Ippolito; P Farsetti; R Caterini; C Tudisco
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Radical reduction in the rate of extensive corrective surgery for clubfoot using the Ponseti method.

Authors:  Jose A Morcuende; Lori A Dolan; Frederick R Dietz; Ignacio V Ponseti
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 7.124

9.  Factors predictive of outcome after use of the Ponseti method for the treatment of idiopathic clubfeet.

Authors:  Matthew B Dobbs; J R Rudzki; Derek B Purcell; Tim Walton; Kristina R Porter; Christina A Gurnett
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  Comparison of surgeon and physiotherapist-directed Ponseti treatment of idiopathic clubfoot.

Authors:  Joseph A Janicki; Unni G Narayanan; Barbara J Harvey; Anvesh Roy; Shannon Weir; James G Wright
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  What is new in idiopathic clubfoot?

Authors:  Ryan M O'Shea; Coleen S Sabatini
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-12

Review 2.  [Ponseti method for treatment of idiopathic clubfoot].

Authors:  K Heck; A Heck; R Placzek
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 1.154

Review 3.  Is the modified Ponseti method effective in treating atypical and complex clubfoot? A systematic review.

Authors:  Omar A Al-Mohrej; Fawaz N Alshaalan; Thamer S Alhussainan
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-06-10       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Percutaneous achillotomy in the treatment of congenital clubfoot: should it be performed in the operating theater or the polyclinic?

Authors:  Ümit Tuhanioğlu; Hasan U Oğur; Fırat Seyfettinoğlu; Hakan Çiçek; Volkan T Tekbaş; Ahmet Kapukaya
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 2.359

5.  Integrated bioinformatics analysis of potential pathway biomarkers using abnormal proteins in clubfoot.

Authors:  Guiquan Cai; Xuan Yang; Ting Chen; Fangchun Jin; Jing Ding; Zhenkai Wu
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-01-20       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  A cross-sectional study investigating impressions and opinions of medical rehabilitation professionals on the effectiveness of the Ponseti method for treatment of clubfoot in Harare, Zimbabwe.

Authors:  N Munambah; M Chiwaridzo; T Mapingure
Journal:  Arch Physiother       Date:  2016-06-30

7.  Influence of cast change interval in the Ponseti method: A systematic review.

Authors:  R B Giesberts; M C van der Steen; P G M Maathuis; A T Besselaar; E E G Hekman; G J Verkerke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  The Correlation of Pirani and Dimeglio Scoring Systems for Ponseti Management at Different Levels of Deformity Severity.

Authors:  Hua Fan; Yubin Liu; Li Zhao; Caiting Chu; Yongyu An; Tingting Wang; Wenhua Li
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Factors Related to Early Recurrence of Idiopathic Clubfoot Post the Ponseti Method.

Authors:  N Limpaphayom; P Sailohit
Journal:  Malays Orthop J       Date:  2019-11

10.  Percutaneous Achilles tenotomy under local anaesthetic in the clubfoot clinic was safe during the COVID-19 pandemic, for both children and parents.

Authors:  Benjamin Barkham; Thomas McNally; Aishling Russell; Anna Bridgens; Yael Gelfer
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2021-07-04       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.