Andriesse Hanneke, Hägglund Gunnar
Department of Orthopedics, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.
Acta Orthop. 2008 Feb;79(1):53-61. doi: 10.1080/17453670710014761.
The outcome of clubfoot treatment is the result of several factors such as severity, type of treatment, and measurement instruments. We compared two intervention groups with two assessment procedures.
16 children were treated consecutively with intensive stretching according to the Copenhagen method and 16 children consecutively with casting according to the Ponseti technique, during their first 2 months of age. The need for surgery was then assessed. At 4 months of age, all children used a dynamic Knee Ankle Foot Orthosis. The Clubfoot Assessment Protocol (CAP) and the Dimeglio Classification System (DCS) were used and compared during treatment and at 2 years of age.
According to the CAP (but not the DCS) the casting technique was superior in clubfoot correction, apparent as better mobility and better quality of motion at 2 years of age. These children also required less surgery. The orthotics management functioned well in both groups, with high compliance and maintenance or slight improvement of the clinical status except for morphology. DCS score changed over time but not between the groups. Because of its multidimensional and narrower scoring interval construct, the CAP enabled us to elucidate and evaluate different clinical functions.
The casting technique according to Ponseti seems to be the better of the two for clubfoot correction, regarding mobility and quality of motion. The Clubfoot Assessment Protocol (but not the Dimeglio Classification System) was able to reveal differences between the Copenhagen and Ponseti treatment methods.
