We reviewed the outcome of 30 patients treated with an Ilizarov frame for resistant clubfoot deformity. Each patient was assessed using objective and subjective outcome measures. We used clinical examination, X-ray analysis, pedobarography and gait analysis and the Activities Scale for Kids questionnaire, developed and validated by The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Canada. The average questionnaire score was 83. This suggested a good subjective outcome when compared to the average score of 38 achieved by children with untreated clubfoot. Patients were into 2 groups using this score. Patients scoring over 75 were considered to have a good outcome and those scoring less than 75 were considered to have a bad outcome. The objective results were then compared. We found no difference between the 2 groups using clinical examination and X-ray. Pedobarography showed lower pressures in the bad subjective group, in particular virtually no pressure was generated under the heel when walking. The pressure distribution also showed the bad group to have the pressure balance towards the front of the foot over the 5th metatarsal head. Gait analysis showed differences. The bad group had increased pelvic obliquity and increased pelvic movement suggesting an inefficient gait, increased hip abduction in swing, hyperextension of the knee on loading and decreased dorsiflexion of the ankle in swing when compared to the good group. Our conclusions were that subjectively this group of patients did well after surgical treatment using an Ilizarov frame. Clinical examination can show significant intra- and inter-observer error and X-ray is unreliable in children whose feet are congenitally deformed. Pedobarography and gait analysis seem to correlate better with subjective outcome. We know that a good foot is a functional foot and it may be that functional assessment is a more appropriate means of assessing results of treatment in these patients.
