Trial reportMedicine2015
Correcting Congenital Talipes Equinovarus in Children Using Three Different Corrective Methods: A Consort Study.
Trial report in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for congenital talipes equinovarus (clubfoot).The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Effectiveness of therapeutic footwear for children: A systematic review.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2020Pooled it
- A polyaxial fixation brace for the treatment of idiopathic congenital talipes equinovarus in newborns.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019Trial
- Key concepts in children's footwear research: a scoping review focusing on therapeutic footwear.Journal of foot and ankle research · 2019Article
- Whole genome sequencing identifies ANXA3 and MTHFR mutations in a large family with an unknown equinus deformity associated genetic disorder.Molecular biology reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Equinus, varus, cavus, and adduction are typical signs of congenital talipes equinovarus (CTEV). Forefoot adduction remains a difficulty from using previous corrective methods. This study aims to develop a corrective method to reduce the severity of forefoot adduction of CTEV children with moderate deformities during their walking age. The devised method was compared with 2 other common corrective methods to evaluate its effectiveness. A Dennis Brown (DB) splint, DB splint with orthopedic shoes (OS), and forefoot abduct shoes (FAS) with OS were, respectively, applied to 15, 20, and 18 CTEV children with moderate deformities who were scored at their first visit according to the Diméglio classification. The mean follow-up was 44 months and the orthoses were changed as the children grew. A 3D scanner and a high-resolution pedobarograph were used to record morphological characteristics and plantar pressure distribution. One-way MAVONA analysis was used to compare the bimalleolar angle, bean-shape ratio, and pressure ratios in each study group. There were significant differences in the FAS+OS group compared to the DB and DB+OS groups (P < 0.05) for most measurements. The most salient differences were as follows: the FAS+OS group had a significantly greater bimalleolar angle (P < 0.05) and lower bean-shape ratio (P < 0.01) than the other groups; the DB+OS and FAS+OS groups had higher heel/forefoot and heel/LMF ratios (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001) than the DB group. FAS are critical for correcting improper forefoot adduction and OS are important for the correction of equinus and varus in moderately afflicted CTEV children. This study suggests that the use of FAS+OS may improve treatment outcomes for moderate CTEV children who do not show signs of serious torsional deformity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.