ArticleInternational orthopaedics2024
Pedobarography and ankle-foot kinematics in children with symptomatic flexible flatfoot after medialising calcaneal osteotomy and controls: a comparative study.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2024. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeFlexible flatfoot (FF) can interrupt children's activity through uneven pressure distribution to the medial column of the foot and may require surgery. Medialising calcaneal osteotomy (MCO) helps restore the foot‒tripod complex. The objective was to compare pedobarography and ankle‒foot kinematics in children with symptomatic FF after MCO to those in controls.
methodsGait analysis was performed on 21 children with FF (37 feet, age 13.7 ± 4.9 years) 4.5 ± 3.4 years after MCO and on 21 controls (42 feet, age 12.1 ± 1.1 years). Ankle‒foot kinematics and pedobarography parameters (maximum pressure, impulse, contact area, and percentage of contact time in the stance phase) of ten anatomic foot regions from an average of five gait trials were compared. The functional outcome was determined by the AOFAS-AHFS score in the FF group.
resultsThe average AOFAS-AHFS score was 96. The FF group had a larger contact area and expressed more force on the medial column of the foot. The maximum pressure, impulse, contact area, and percentage of contact time in the stance phase in the midfoot region for the FF and control groups were 0.66 ± 0.5 vs. 0.24 ± 0.4 N/cm
conclusionsThe MCO procedure did not normalise the pressure on the midfoot in FF to the level of that in the controls, and the deformity persisted in the forefoot.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39235617What 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.