Skip to main content

Evaluation of the utility of the Ponseti method of correction of clubfoot deformity in a developing nation

International Orthopaedics volume 32, pages 75–79 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

Clubfoot is the commonest congenital deformity in babies. More than 100,000 babies are born worldwide each year with congenital clubfoot. Around 80% of the cases occur in developing nations. We treated 154 feet [mean Pirani score (total) 5.57] in 96 children (78 males, 18 females) by the Ponseti method from January 2003 to December 2005. A prospective follow-up for a mean duration of 19.5 months (range 6–32 months) was undertaken. After six months of treatment the Pirani score was reduced to zero for all patients. The results show that corrective surgery, sometimes multiple, can be avoided in most cases which are usually associated with the development of a stiff, painful foot. Low socio-economic status and illiteracy prevailing in developing nations increases the prevalence of neglected clubfoot that is still harder to correct. Integration into various programs and proper use of available resources can decrease neglected clubfoot and improve chances of successful and timely correction of deformity. Bracing constitutes an important part of treatment and proper motivation and education of the parents mitigates the chances of losing correction. The Ponseti method of correcting clubfoot is especially important in developing countries, where operative facilities are not available in the remote areas and well-trained physicians and personnel can manage the cases effectively with cast treatment only.

Résumé

Le pied bot est parmi les déformations les plus habituelles chez l’enfant. Plus de 100.000 enfants naissent chaque année avec un pied bot congénital. 80% des cas proviennent des pays en voie de développement. Nous avons traité 150 cas de pieds avec un score de Pirani moyen de 5.57 chez 96 enfants. 78 étaient de sexe masculin, 18 de sexe féminin. Nous avons utilisé la méthode de Ponseti de janvier 2003 à décembre 2005. Une étude prospective a été réalisée sur une période de 19,5 mois (6 à 32 mois). Après six mois de traitement, le score de Pirani a été réduit à 0 chez tous les patients. Le résultat montre qu’une correction chirurgicale peut être parfois nécessaire dans les cas présentant un pied raide et très douloureux. L’utilisation de toutes les ressources nécessaires permettent de diminuer le nombre de pieds bots négligés et d’améliorer les chances de succès du traitement de cette déformation. Le traitement orthopédique est une part importante du traitement et la motivation et l’éducation des parents augmentent les chances de succès et diminuent les pertes de correction. La méthode de Ponseti est très importante dans les pays en voie de développement (80%) où les conditions opératoires ne sont pas très faciles et nécessitent un personnel entraîné.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

43,34 €

Price includes VAT (Finland)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  1. Brand RA, Laaveg SJ, Crowninshield RD, Ponseti IV (1981) The center of pressure path in treated clubfoot. Clin Orthop Relat Res 160:43–47

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Colburn M, Williams M (2003) Evaluation of the treatment of idiopathic clubfoot by using the Ponseti method. J Foot Ankle Surg 42(5):259–267

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cooper DM, Dietz FR (1995) Treatment of idiopathic clubfoot: a thirty-year follow-up note. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77(10):1477–1489

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Cowell HR, Wein BK (1980) Genetic aspect of clubfoot. J Bone Joint Surg Am 62(8):1381–1384

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dobbs MB, Gordon JE, Walton T, Schoenecker P (2004) Bleeding complications following percutaneous tendoachilles tenotomy in the treatment of clubfoot deformity. J Pediatr Orthop 24(4):353–357

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Herzenberg JE, Radler C, Bor N (2002) Ponseti versus traditional methods of casting for idiopathic clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop 22(4):517–521

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Ippolito E, Farsetti P, Caterini R, Tudisco C (2003) Long-term comparative results in patients with congenital clubfoot treated with two different protocols. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(7):1286–1294

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Laaveg SJ, Ponseti IV (1980) Long-term results of treatment of congenital clubfoot. J Bone Joint Surg Am 62(1):23–31

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Morcuende JA, Abbasi D, Dolan LA, Ponseti IV (2005) Results of an accelerated Ponseti protocol for clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop 25(5):623–626

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Morcuende JA, Dolan LA, Dietz FR, Ponseti IV (2004) Radical reduction in the rate of extensive corrective surgery for clubfoot using the Ponseti method. Pediatrics 113(2):376–380

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Palmer RM (1964) Genetics of talipes equinus varus. J Bone Joint Surg Am 46:542–556

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ponseti IV, Smoley EN (1963) Congenital clubfoot: the results of treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am 45(2):2261–2275

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ponseti IV (1992) Treatment of congenital clubfoot. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74(3):448–454

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Ponseti IV (1994) The treatment of congenital clubfoot. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 20(1):1

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Ponseti IV (1998) Correction of the talar neck angle in congenital clubfoot with sequential manipulation and casting. Iowa Orthop J 18:74–75

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Ponseti IV (2000) Clubfoot management. J Pediatr Orthop 20(6):699–700

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Scher DM, Feldman DS, Van Bosse HJ, Sala DA, Lehman WB (2004) Predicting the need for tenotomy in the Ponseti method for correction of clubfeet. J Pediatr Orthop 24(4):349–352

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Thacker MM, Scher DM, Sala DA, Van Bosse HJ, Feldman DS, Lehman WB (2005) Use of the foot abduction orthosis following ponseti casts: is it essential? J Pediatr Orthop 25(2):225–228

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Yamamoto H (1979) A clinical, genetic and epidemiologic study of congenital clubfoot. Jinrui Idengaku Zasshi 24(1):37–44

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Department Of Orthopedics, Smt. Nathibaa Hargovinddas Lakshmi Chand Municipal Medical College, Ellis Bridge, Ahmadabad, India

    Ankur Gupta, Saurabh Singh, Pankaj Patel & Jyotish Patel

  2. Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

    Manish Kumar Varshney

  3. C-28, sector-40, Noida, 201301, Uttar Pradesh, India

    Saurabh Singh

Authors
  1. Ankur Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saurabh Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pankaj Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jyotish Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Manish Kumar Varshney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saurabh Singh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gupta, A., Singh, S., Patel, P. et al. Evaluation of the utility of the Ponseti method of correction of clubfoot deformity in a developing nation. International Orthopaedics (SICO 32, 75–79 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-006-0284-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-006-0284-7

Keywords

  • Clubfoot
  • Ponseti Method
  • Idiopathic Clubfoot
  • Clubfoot Deformity
  • Night Splint