Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Foot Ankle Surg. 2010 May-Jun;49(3):232-7. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2010.02.004. Epub 2010 Mar 20.

Prospective assessment of dorsal cheilectomy for hallux rigidus using a patient-reported outcome score.

Author information

1
Trauma and Orthopaedics, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, Norfolk, England. timharrison001@hotmail.com

Abstract

Compared with other surgical procedures for hallux rigidus, dorsal cheilectomy involves relatively less bone removal, maintains joint motion, and leaves the potential for further salvage surgery. The Manchester-Oxford Foot and Ankle Questionnaire (MOXFQ) has a maximum score of 64 (worst foot health) and has been endorsed by the British Foot and Ankle Society to measure surgical outcome. We prospectively assessed patient-reported outcomes after dorsal cheilectomy for hallux rigidus using the MOXFQ. Patients were deemed suitable for dorsal cheilectomy if they had painful restriction of terminal dorsiflexion, with absence of pain in the mid-range of passive movement, and radiographic evidence of dorsal osteophytosis. Twenty-five patients with a mean age of 62 years (range, 39-80 years), including 17 (68%) women, underwent dorsal cheilectomy for hallux rigidus. The mean preoperative MOXFQ score was 33.0 (95% confidence interval = 27.4-38.6), and, at a mean of 17 months (range, 9-27 months) follow-up, the mean postoperative score was 9.6 (95% confidence interval = 6.0-13.2). Eighty-four percent of patients experienced clinically significantly improved walking domain, 68% in the social domain, and 59% in the pain domain of the MOXFQ. Four patients failed cheilectomy, including 3 who subsequently underwent arthrodesis for persistent pain and 1 who experienced no improvement in any domain of the MOXFQ. This prospective study provided further evidence of the success of dorsal cheilectomy as a treatment for hallux rigidus and demonstrated the potential usefulness of the MOXFQ in assessing surgical outcomes in foot surgery.

PMID:
20303801
DOI:
10.1053/j.jfas.2010.02.004
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center