Clinical outcomes and risk-factor analysis of the Ponseti Method in a low-resource setting: Clubfoot care in Haiti.

Purpose: The Ponseti Method has dramatically altered the management of clubfoot, with particular implications for limited-resource settings. We sought to describe outcomes of care and risk factors for sub-optimal results using the Ponseti Method in Haiti.
Methods: We conducted a records review of patients presenting from 2011-2015 to a CURE Clubfoot clinic in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. We report patient characteristics (demographics and clinical), treatment patterns (cast number/duration and tenotomy rates), and outcomes (relapse and complications). We compared treatment with benchmarks in high-income nations and used generalized linear models to identify risk factors for delayed presentation, increased number of casts, and relapse.
Results: Amongst 168 children, age at presentation ranged from 0 days (birth) to 4.4 years, 62% were male, 35% were born at home, 63% had bilateral disease, and 46% had idiopathic clubfeet. Prior treatment (RR 6.33, 95% CI 3.18-12.62) was associated with a higher risk of delayed presentation. Risk factors for requiring ≥ 10 casts included having a non-idiopathic diagnosis (RR 2.28, 95% CI 1.08-4.83) and higher Pirani score (RR 2.78 per 0.5 increase, 95% CI 1.17-6.64). Female sex (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.01-2.34) and higher Pirani score (RR 1.09 per 0.5 increase, 95% CI 1.00-1.17) were risk factors for relapse. Compared to North American benchmarks, children presented later (median 4.1 wks [IQR 1.6-18.1] vs. 1 wk), with longer casting (12.5 wks [SD 9.8] vs. 7.1 wks), and higher relapse (43% vs. 22%).
Conclusions: Higher Pirani score, prior treatment, non-idiopathic diagnosis, and female sex were associated with a higher risk of sub-optimal outcomes in this low-resource setting. Compared to high-income nations, serial casting began later, with longer duration and higher relapse. Identifying patients at risk for poor outcomes in a low-resource setting can guide counseling, program development, and resource allocation.
Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.