Anthropometric Study of Patients Treated for Clubfoot

Calf Circumference Discrepancies in Patients With Unilateral Clubfoot

“…17 Cooper and Dietz 9 used criteria that combined subjective and objective evaluations of pain and function of the limb, and showed that adults who had been treated for clubfoot with the Ponseti method were nearly identical to controls without TEV: 62% of clubfoot patients versus 63% of normal controls had an excellent foot. The Ponseti method does not fully reestablish normal foot size, 18 but Kesemenli et al 15 found that Ponseti technique achieves a closer approximation of anatomic foot normalcy compared with operative treatment.…”

“…Shortened tibial length, reduced foot height, and joint stiffness have been demonstrated following extensive surgical treatment. 3,4,[13][14][15][16] The Ponseti method achieves excellent long-term outcomes, both functional and anatomic, regardless of the presenting complexity of the disorder. 17 Cooper and Dietz 9 used criteria that combined subjective and objective evaluations of pain and function of the limb, and showed that adults who had been treated for clubfoot with the Ponseti method were nearly identical to controls without TEV: 62% of clubfoot patients versus 63% of normal controls had an excellent foot.…”

Development of Foot Length in Children with Congenital Clubfoot up to 7 Years of Age: A Prospective Follow-Up Study

“…The median age at the rst foot length measurement was 2 years (range, 2-3 years). The median number of measurements for each child was 10 (range, [8][9][10][11].…”

“…Hemo et al found that severity score at baseline and number of casts needed for correction correlated with foot length before the start of treatment [7]. Foot size at end of growth can also depend on the treatment method [8][9][10]. Wallace et al showed that in unilateral cases, nonsurgically treated clubfeet were 1.3 shoe sizes larger than surgically treated clubfeet, and that both surgically and nonsurgically treated clubfeet were signi cantly shorter than the contralateral feet at ages 10 to 12 years [8].…”

“…Wallace et al showed that in unilateral cases, nonsurgically treated clubfeet were 1.3 shoe sizes larger than surgically treated clubfeet, and that both surgically and nonsurgically treated clubfeet were signi cantly shorter than the contralateral feet at ages 10 to 12 years [8]. Kesemenli et al showed that unilateral clubfeet were 9-15 mm shorter than the contralateral feet depending on the age and treatment method, with the surgically treated clubfeet showing a greater difference [10].…”