Siddiqui 2007.
Methods | RCT. Two‐arm parallel‐group design | |
Participants | 60 patients who presented to a single centre (number of CTEV feet unknown) Inclusion criteria: CTEV with Dimeglio grade I and II undergoing surgical correction Exclusion criteria: CTEV with Dimeglio grade III and IV PARTICIPANT CHARACTERISTICS Age range in months: 6 to 18 Sex male (%): 61.7% Basline severity: Dimeglio grade I, 20 participants; Dimeglio grade II, 40 participants Window procedure Age mean: 9.5 months Characteristics of feet: 30 participants (bilateral and unilateral numbers not reported) Baseline severity: not stated Turco procedure Age mean: 9.6 months Characteristics of feet: 30 participants (bilateral and unilateral numbers not reported) Baseline severity: not stated |
|
Interventions | Window procedure versus Turco procedure for treatment of CTEV Participants were randomised equally into both groups The Window procedure was not described in detail in the article. It utilises five or six small incisions rather than a long posteromedial incision. Postoperatively the foot is placed in a plaster in the corrected position. Details of the plaster were not provided In the Turco group, postoperatively a cast was not applied for 15 days because of oedema Follow‐up: not stated |
|
Outcomes | Dimeglio scale Postoperative assessment criteria according to Beatson 6 months after surgery Time in theatre Adverse events |
|
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Insufficient information |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | Unable to blind intervention provider. Assessor blinding not reported. Participant blinding unlikely to affect outcome |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | No missing data |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Follow‐up time not reported |
Other bias | High risk | Procedure was developed, used and assessed by the same team within the same population. Bilateral and unilateral numbers not reported. Follow‐up times not reported |