Casting Is Effective for Recurrence Following Ponseti Treatment of Clubfoot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Up to 40% of patients with idiopathic clubfoot who are treated with the Ponseti method experience recurrence of deformity. Many of these patients receive surgery (e.g., anterior tibial tendon transfer). An alternative approach for recurrent clubfoot is repeat Ponseti casting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of repeat Ponseti casting in the treatment of recurrent clubfoot. METHODS: Patients with recurrent idiopathic clubfoot who were treated at our hospital, between 2004 and 2012, with repeat serial casting and bracing (the recurrent group) were eligible for inclusion in the study. The recurrent group and a control group of randomly selected patients seen during the same period who had not had recurrence were compared with respect to demographic data, age at the time of treatment, number of casts, subsequent surgical intervention(s), and the Disease-Specific Instrument (DSI) clubfoot scale. Patients were deemed to have a successful outcome if they had a well-corrected foot (defined as dorsiflexion of ≥10°, hindfoot in valgus, and a straight lateral border) at the time of follow-up. RESULTS: Of a total of 71 eligible patients with clubfeet, 35 patients participated. At the time of follow-up, success rates were 74% for the recurrent group and 83% for the control group. Dorsiflexion past neutral was significantly higher in the control group than the patient group (20° versus 12°, respectively; p < 0.001). Ninety-five percent of the control subjects had a straight lateral border in comparison with 78% in the recurrent group (p = 0.004). Likewise, 97% of controls had the hindfoot in valgus in comparison with 80% of the recurrent group (p = 0.02). There was a significant difference in the ability to squat (76% in the control group and 43% in the recurrent group; p = 0.03). There was no difference between groups in the total outcome of the DSI. CONCLUSIONS: Recurrence was seen in 19% (71) of 382 children who were eligible for our study who were typically discharged after the age of 5 years from our clinic, indicating the importance of continued follow-up until after that age. Treatment with casting was successful in many patients and may be a reasonable choice for recurrent idiopathic clubfeet. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".