Bracing for Impact: A Survey Analysis of the Impact of Socioeconomic Factors on Brace Adherence in Clubfoot

Authors: Océane Mauffrey [1], Kevin Yu [2], Malvika Choudhari [1], Ashley Lynn Habig [3], Alec Pugh [1], Vinay Narotam [4]

[1] The University of North Carolina, School of Medicine, 321 S. Columbia Street, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States of America

[2] The University of North Carolina, Gillings School of Public Health 135 Dauer Drive, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, United States of America

[3] The University of North Carolina, Undergraduate, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, United State of America

[4] The University of North Carolina, Department of Orthopaedics, 130 Mason Farm Road, Chapel Hill, NC 27514, United States of America Address of Correspondence

Address of Correspondence:
Dr. Océane Mauffrey,
The University of North Carolina, School of Medicine, 321 S. Columbia Street, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, United States of America.
E-mail: Oceane_mauffrey@med.unc.edu

Article Received : 2025-01-11,

Article Accepted : 2025-04-10

Background: Clubfoot is a congenital deformity characterized by cavus deformity of the midfoot, adductus of the forefoot and equinus and varus of the hindfoot. The Ponseti method, a series of casting and bracing protocols has become the standard of care as a highly effective non-surgical intervention. Poor adherence with stringent brace wearing protocols has been identified as one of the leading causes of deformity recurrence with the Ponseti method. The present study seeks to uncover the socioeconomic variables which may contribute to brace adherence.

Methods: This survey study included 219 patients, 56 responded (25.5% RR). The survey assessed zip code, annual income, number of caregivers and siblings, brace adherence, and recurrence. Adherence was measured categorically (Likert) and continuously (0-100%); recurrence was measured categorically (yes/no). A t-test was used to evaluate the relationship between adherence and deformity recurrence. All other variables were analyzed using chi squared and Fischer’s exact.

Results: 23 patients reported an annual income of $100,000 or greater (n=23), and most had received at least a college education (n=37), many had graduate’s degrees (n=20), most reported two caregivers (n=44), and 1 sibling (n=21). 36 patients reported brace wearing All of the time, and 21 patients reported their child needing to repeat serial casting or additional surgery, indicating recurrence. No significant relationship was found between brace adherence and deformity recurrence (p>0.05). No significant relationship was found between annual income, number of caregivers, highest level of education, number of siblings against brace adherence (p>0.05).

Conclusion: These findings contrast with the well-documented risk of recurrence with decreased brace adherence; perhaps due to parental overreporting of brace wearing. The expected relationship between social variables and brace adherence was also not supported potentially because of a skew in our population towards patients with higher education and income.

Keywords: Clubfoot, Social Determinants of Health, Clinical Outcomes, Brace Compliance.

Click here to read similar articles from PubMed

References

1.
Shabtai L. Worldwide spread of the Ponseti method for clubfoot. World J Orthop. 2014;5(5):585. doi:10.5312/wjo.v5.i5.585 [Google Scholar]
2.
Rieger MA, Dobbs MB. Clubfoot. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2022;39(1):1-14. doi:10.1016/j.cpm.2021.08.006 [Google Scholar]
3.
Cady R, Hennessey TA, Schwend RM. Diagnosis and Treatment of Idiopathic Congenital Clubfoot. Pediatrics. 2022;149(2):e2021055555. doi:10.1542/peds.2021-055555 [Google Scholar]
4.
Dobbs MB, Rudzki JR, Purcell DB, Walton T, Porter KR, Gurnett CA. Factors Predictive of Outcome After Use of the Ponseti Method for the Treatment of Idiopathic Clubfeet: J Bone Jt Surg-Am Vol. 2004;86(1):22-27. doi:10.2106/00004623-200401000-00005 [Google Scholar]
5.
Švehlík M, Floh U, Steinwender G, Sperl M, Novak M, Kraus T. Ponseti method is superior to surgical treatment in clubfoot – Long-term, randomized, prospective trial. Gait Posture. 2017;58:346-351. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2017.08.010 [Google Scholar]
6.
Wang YY, Su YC, Tu YK, et al. Determining the Optimal Treatment for Idiopathic Clubfoot: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Bone Jt Surg. 2024;106(4):356-367. doi:10.2106/JBJS.22.01210 [Google Scholar]
7.
Recordon JAF, Halanski MA, Boocock MG, McNair PJ, Stott NS, Crawford HA. A Prospective, Median 15-Year Comparison of Ponseti Casting and Surgical Treatment of Clubfoot. J Bone Jt Surg. 2021;103(21):1986-1995. doi:10.2106/JBJS.20.02014 [Google Scholar]
8.
Ganesan B, Luximon A, Al-Jumaily A, Balasankar SK, Naik GR. Ponseti method in the management of clubfoot under 2 years of age: A systematic review. Nazarian A, ed. PLOS ONE. 2017;12(6):e0178299. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0178299 [Google Scholar]
9.
Abdelgawad AA, Lehman WB, Van Bosse HJP, Scher DM, Sala DA. Treatment of idiopathic clubfoot using the Ponseti method: minimum 2-year follow-up. J Pediatr Orthop B. 2007;16(2):98-105. doi:10.1097/BPB.0b013e32801048bb [Google Scholar]
10.
Ramírez N, Flynn JM, Fernández S, Seda W, Macchiavelli RE. Orthosis Noncompliance After the Ponseti Method for the Treatment of Idiopathic Clubfeet: A Relevant Problem That Needs Reevaluation. J Pediatr Orthop. 2011;31(6):710-715. doi:10.1097/BPO.0b013e318221eaa1 [Google Scholar]
11.
Jawadi AH, Al-Abbasi EM, Tamim HA. Factors predicting brace noncompliance among idiopathic clubfoot patients treated with the Ponseti method. J Taibah Univ Med Sci. 2015;10(4):444-448. doi:10.1016/j.jtumed.2015.06.003 [Google Scholar]
12.
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Harran University, School of Medicine, Sanliurfa, Turkey, Bozkurt C, Sipahioglu S, Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Harran University, School of Medicine, Sanliurfa, Turkey. Effects of younger siblings on the brace compliance and recurrence in children with clubfoot during Ponseti treatment. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2021;55(2):102-106. doi:10.5152/j.aott.2021.20040 [Google Scholar]
13.
Zionts LE, Dietz FR. Bracing Following Correction of Idiopathic Clubfoot Using the Ponseti Method: Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010;18(8):486-493. doi:10.5435/00124635-201008000-00005 [Google Scholar]
14.
Avilucea FR, Szalay EA, Bosch PP, Sweet KR, Schwend RM. Effect of Cultural Factors on Outcome of Ponseti Treatment of Clubfeet in Rural America: J Bone Jt Surg-Am Vol. 2009;91(3):530-540. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00580 [Google Scholar]
15.
Haft GF, Walker CG, Crawford HA. Early Clubfoot Recurrence After Use of the Ponseti Method in a New Zealand Population: J Bone Jt Surg. 2007;89(3):487-493. doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.00169 [Google Scholar]
16.
Hu W, Ke B, Niansu X, et al. Factors associated with the relapse in Ponseti treated congenital clubfoot. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022;23(1):88. doi:10.1186/s12891-022-05039-9 [Google Scholar]
17.
Van Schelven H, Moerman S, Van Der Steen M, Besselaar AT, Greve C. Prognostic factors for recurrent idiopathic clubfoot deformity: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Acta Orthop. Published online October 5, 2021:1-9. doi:10.1080/17453674.2021.1982576 [Google Scholar]
18.
Morgenstein A, Davis R, Talwalkar V, Iwinski H, Walker J, Milbrandt TA. A Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Reported and Measured Wear Rates in Clubfoot Bracing Using a Novel Pressure Sensor. J Pediatr Orthop. 2015;35(2):185-191. doi:10.1097/BPO.0000000000000205 [Google Scholar]
19.
Sangiorgio SN, Ho NC, Morgan RD, Ebramzadeh E, Zionts LE. The Objective Measurement of Brace-Use Adherence in the Treatment of Idiopathic Clubfoot. J Bone Jt Surg. 2016;98(19):1598-1605. doi:10.2106/JBJS.16.00170 [Google Scholar]

Spread the love

Visited 79 times, 1 visit(s) today

How to Cite This Article: Mauffrey O, Yu K, Choudhari M, Habig AL, Pugh A, Narotam V. Bracing for Impact: A Survey Analysis of the Impact of Socioeconomic Factors on Brace Adherence in Clubfoot. Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics 2025 June, 10(06): 4-7.

Menu

References