These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of Plantar Pressure Distribution and Functional Outcome after Scarf and Austin Osteotomy.
    Author: Puchner SE, Trnka HJ, Willegger M, Staats K, Holinka J, Windhager R, Schuh R.
    Journal: Orthop Surg; 2018 Aug; 10(3):255-263. PubMed ID: 30152604.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To investigate the changes of plantar pressure distribution in patients who underwent either Austin or Scarf osteotomy and underwent a postoperative rehabilitation program. METHODS: Between September 2006 and December 2007, 50 participants who suffered from mild to moderate hallux valgus deformity were prospectively included in this study. An Austin osteotomy (Austin group) was performed in 25 patients and a Scarf osteotomy (Scarf group) in 25 patients. Indication for the Scarf or Austin technique was made according to the consensus of the Austrian society of foot and ankle surgery. Plantar pressure analysis was performed at 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 6 months postoperatively. Furthermore, range of motion and the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) questionnaire were evaluated. RESULTS: In the big toe and first metatarsal head region in groups, maximum force, peak pressure, and force-time integral increased significantly from 4 weeks to 6 months postoperatively (P ≤ 0.001). The mean AOFAS score increased from 60.7 preoperatively to 93.1 6 months after Austin surgery and from 56.7 preoperatively to 94.4 6 months after Scarf surgery. The Austin group had a mean range of motion (ROM) of 68.5° that increased to a mean ROM of 75.5° 6 months postoperatively, while the Scarf group had a mean ROM of 67.8° that increased to a mean ROM of 68.2° 6 months postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Despite different surgical techniques and the degree of deformity, there were no differences in plantar pressure parameters and functional outcomes between both groups.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]