ArticleInternational orthopaedics2023
What exactly is "foot abduction" during management of idiopathic clubfoot in clinical practice?
Article in International orthopaedics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThere is however gross ambiguity regarding the use of term "foot abduction" in clubfoot treatment. We measured below defined angles at different stages of clubfoot treatment to decipher their precise interpretation.
methodsIn a prospective evaluation of 25 unilateral clubfeet in infants' age less than six months treated with Ponseti technique, clinical leg foot and thigh foot angle were measured at talar head reduction (LHT0), pre-tenotomy, and post-tenotomy stage. A "normal" reference was available in the form of measurements of contralateral limb.
resultsTalar head (LHT0) was reduced at mean leg foot angle of 26 degrees. The corresponding pre- and post-tenotomy angles were 42.6 and 50.0 degrees, respectively. The reference leg foot angles for contralateral limb were 49.8 degrees. The thigh foot angle for LHT0, pre-tenotomy, post-tenotomy, and contralateral side were, respectively, 39.2, 56, 68, and 65.6 degrees. There was an additional tibial external rotation component of mean 13.4 degrees (SD 4.5) in the thigh foot angle when compared to the leg foot angle at tenotomy. This increased to 18 degrees (SD 3.4) post-tenotomy.
conclusionsThe study suggested that the foot abduction described in the "Ponseti Manual" probably intends thigh foot rather than leg foot angles. There was a significant difference in the angles when talar head reduced and tenotomy was decided. The foot abduction is an ambiguous term which should be replaced by the more specific leg or thigh foot abduction angle.
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.