↓ Skip to main content

Mid-term results of a physiotherapist-led Ponseti service for the management of non-idiopathic and idiopathic clubfoot

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Children's Orthopaedics, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
53 Mendeley
Title
Mid-term results of a physiotherapist-led Ponseti service for the management of non-idiopathic and idiopathic clubfoot
Published in
Journal of Children's Orthopaedics, June 2015
DOI 10.1007/s11832-015-0658-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mia Dunkley, Yael Gelfer, Debbie Jackson, Evette Parnell, Jennifer Armstong, Cristina Rafter, Deborah M. Eastwood

Abstract

The Ponseti method is the preferred treatment for idiopathic clubfoot. Although popularised by orthopaedic surgeons it has expanded to physiotherapists and other health practitioners. This study reviews the results of a physiotherapist-led Ponseti service for idiopathic and non-idiopathic clubfeet and compares these results with those reported by other groups. A prospective cohort of clubfeet (2005-2012) with a minimum 2-year follow-up after correction was reviewed. Physiotherapists treated 91 children-41 patients (69 feet) had non-idiopathic deformities and 50 children (77 feet) were idiopathic. Objective outcomes were evaluated and compared to results from other groups managing similar patient cohorts. The mean follow-up was 4.6 years (range 2-8.3 years) for both groups. The non-idiopathic group required a median of 7 casts to correct the clubfoot deformity with an 83 % tenotomy rate compared to a median of 5 casts for the idiopathic group with a 63 % tenotomy rate. Initial correction was achieved in 96 % of non-idiopathic feet and in 100 % of idiopathic feet. Recurrence requiring additional treatment was higher in the non-idiopathic group with 40 % of patients (36 % of feet) sustaining a relapse as opposed to 8 % (6 % feet) in the idiopathic group. Surgery was required in 26 % of relapsed non-idiopathic feet and 6 % of idiopathic. Although Ponseti treatment was not as successful in non-idiopathic feet as in idiopathic feet, deformity correction was achieved and maintained in the mid-term for the majority of feet. These results compare favourably to other specialist orthopaedic-based services for Ponseti management of non-idiopathic clubfeet. Prognostic Level III.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 53 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 26%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Professor 4 8%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 12 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 17%
Engineering 3 6%
Sports and Recreations 2 4%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 12 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 April 2016.
All research outputs
#15,366,818
of 22,860,626 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Children's Orthopaedics
#175
of 326 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,030
of 267,500 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Children's Orthopaedics
#4
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,860,626 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 326 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.2. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,500 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.