![]() |
JOURNAL TOOLS |
Publishing options |
eTOC |
To subscribe |
Submit an article |
Recommend to your librarian |
ARTICLE TOOLS |
Reprints |
Permissions |
Share |


YOUR ACCOUNT
YOUR ORDERS
SHOPPING BASKET
Items: 0
Total amount: € 0,00
HOW TO ORDER
YOUR SUBSCRIPTIONS
YOUR ARTICLES
YOUR EBOOKS
COUPON
ACCESSIBILITY
TECHNICAL NOTES
Chirurgia Del Piede 1999 September;23(3):133-40
Copyright © 1999 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA
language: Italian
Triplanar Austin osteotomy for the correction of hallux valgus deformity. A five year follow-up
Ronconi P., Monachino P., Baleanu P. M., Favilli G.
The authors present a 5-year follow-up of the triplanar Austin osteotomy, evaluating long-term patient satisfaction and objective clinical and radiographic examinations. The study group included 64 patients that underwent a total of 79 Austin bunionectomies at the Foot Medical Hospital in Rome, Italy, from January 1990 through Dicember 1991. Patient satisfaction was rated: good to excellent: 89%; fair: 3%; poor: 8%. Radiographic findings included: intermetatarsal angle (IMA) -mean: 8.6°; hallux abductus angle (HAA) -mean: 9.8° ; proximal articular set angle (PASA) -mean: 10.3°; tibial sesamoid position mean: 2.9. Radiographic findings consistent with nonunion were noted on one patient, one foot, although the patient was clinically asymptomatic. There was no evidence of avascular necrosis, and there were 2 cases of varus condition. Clinical findings included: dorsiflexion mean: 36°; plantarflexion mean: 19°; total first MPJ motion mean: 55°; hallux purchase power mean: 2.3; forefoot supination angle mean: 7°. In conclusion, the long.term favorable patient satisfaction scores obtained in this study, the radiographic findings, and the result of the physical examinations indicate and support the use of the Austin osteotomy for the correction and the maintenance of the correction of this deformity. Nevertheless, the parameters examinated are inadequate. Patient satisfaction cannot be attributed to individual factors, but must be measured in aggregate. The use of a standardized evaluation system would allow for a better comparison of patient satisfaction among different patient groups.