Validity and responsiveness of the Clubfoot Assessment Protocol (CAP). A methodological study
- PMID: 16539716
- PMCID: PMC1434742
- DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-7-28
Validity and responsiveness of the Clubfoot Assessment Protocol (CAP). A methodological study
Abstract
Background: The Clubfoot Assessment Protocol (CAP) is a multi dimensional instrument designed for longitudinal follow up of the clubfoot deformity during growth. Item reliability has shown to be sufficient. In this article the CAP's validity and responsiveness is studied using the Dimeglio classification scoring as a gold standard.
Methods: Thirty-two children with 45 congenital clubfeet were assessed prospectively and consecutively at ages of new-born, one, two, four months and two years of age. For convergent/divergent construct validity the Spearman's correlation coefficients were calculated. Discriminate validity was evaluated by studying the scores in bilateral clubfeet. The floor-ceiling effects at baseline (untreated clubfeet) and at two years of age (treated clubfeet) were evaluated. Responsiveness was evaluated by using effect sizes (ES) and by calculating if significant changes (Wilcoxons signed test) had occurred between the different measurement occasions.
Results: High to moderate significant correlation were found between CAP mobility I and morphology and the Dimeglio scores (rs = 0.77 and 0.44 respectively). Low correlation was found between CAP muscle function, mobility II and motion quality and the Dimeglio scoring system (rs = 0.20, 0.09 and 0.06 respectively). Of 13 children with bilateral clubfeet, 11 showed different CAP mobility I scores between right and left foot at baseline (untreated) compared with 5 with the Dimeglio score. At the other assessment occasions the CAP mobility I continued to show higher discrimination ability than the Dimeglio. No floor effects and low ceiling effects were found in the untreated clubfeet for both instruments. High ceiling effects were found in the CAP for the treated children and low for the Dimeglio. Responsiveness was good. ES from untreated to treated ranged from 0.80 to 4.35 for the CAP subgroups and was 4.68 for the Dimeglio. The first four treatment months, the CAP mobility I had generally higher ES compared with the Dimeglio.
Conclusion: The Clubfoot Assessment Protocol shows in this study good validity and responsiveness. The CAP is more responsive when severity ranges between mild-moderate to severe, while the Dimeglio focuses more on the extremes. The ability to discriminate between different mobility status of the right and left foot in bilaterally affected children in this population was higher compared with the Dimeglio score implicating a better sensitivity for the CAP.
Figures
Similar articles
-
[Comparison of long-term results between muscle-strength balancing procedure and Mckay procedure in treating congenital clubfoot].Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2007 Oct;21(10):1108-12. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2007. PMID: 17990780 Chinese.
-
Comparison of serial casting and stretching technique in children with congenital idiopathic clubfoot: evaluation of a new assessment system.Acta Orthop. 2008 Feb;79(1):53-61. doi: 10.1080/17453670710014761. Acta Orthop. 2008. PMID: 18283573
-
Gait analysis of children treated for moderate clubfoot with physical therapy versus the Ponseti cast technique.J Pediatr Orthop. 2010 Apr-May;30(3):235-9. doi: 10.1097/BPO.0b013e3181d3cba8. J Pediatr Orthop. 2010. PMID: 20357588 Clinical Trial.
-
Congenital idiopathic clubfoot.Orthop Nurs. 1999 Jul-Aug;18(4):47-55; quiz 56-8. doi: 10.1097/00006416-199907000-00014. Orthop Nurs. 1999. PMID: 11052041 Review.
-
The influence of laterality, sex and family history on clubfoot severity.J Child Orthop. 2020 Apr 1;14(2):145-150. doi: 10.1302/1863-2548.14.190184. J Child Orthop. 2020. PMID: 32351628 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Tarsal decancellation in the residual resistant arthrogrypotic clubfoot.Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011 Mar;93(2):139-45. doi: 10.1308/003588411X12851639107430. Epub 2010 Nov 4. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2011. PMID: 21054925 Free PMC article.
-
Reliability and validity of motion analysis in children treated for congenital clubfoot according to the Clubfoot Assessment Protocol (CAP) using inexperienced assessors.BMC Res Notes. 2009 Jun 12;2:103. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-2-103. BMC Res Notes. 2009. PMID: 19523200 Free PMC article.
-
Outcomes of Management of Severe Clubfoot among Children by Ilizarov External Fixator.Malays Orthop J. 2023 Nov;17(3):9-16. doi: 10.5704/MOJ.2311.003. Malays Orthop J. 2023. PMID: 38107355 Free PMC article.
-
Motor ability in children treated for idiopathic clubfoot. A controlled pilot study.BMC Pediatr. 2009 Dec 15;9:78. doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-9-78. BMC Pediatr. 2009. PMID: 20003483 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
The PBS Score - a clinical assessment tool for the ambulatory and recurrent clubfoot.J Child Orthop. 2019 Jun 1;13(3):282-292. doi: 10.1302/1863-2548.13.190077. J Child Orthop. 2019. PMID: 31312268 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Dimeglio A, Bensahel H, Souchet P, Mazeau P, Bonnet F. Classification of clubfoot. J Pediatr Orthop. 1995;4:129–36. - PubMed
-
- Reimann I. Congenital Idiopathic Clubfoot. Copenhagen: University of Copenhagen; 1962.
-
- Ponseti IV. Congenital clubfoot. Oxford University Press; 1996.
-
- World Health Organization Classification, Assessment, Surveys and Terminology Team. ICIDH. Geneva Switserland Prefinal draft. 2000. Fullversion.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous