Gait patterns for children with cerebral palsy: proceed with caution
T. Novacheck
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.13244
2017-01-01
Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology
Abstract:Over the past few decades, the advent and development of clinical gait analysis has helped clinicians and scientists to decide what interventions to perform and how to assess outcomes. The paper by Rethlefsen et al. contains some important warnings of what ‘not to do’. The scientific community is well aware of the many limitations of retrospective studies, and Rethlefsen et al. manage to avoid such problems. In this case, the authors track the development of gait abnormalities by leveraging a comprehensive database developed with concurrently gathered data on pretreatment gait tests from a high quality, busy clinical gait lab (certified by the Commission on Motion Lab Accreditation). This paper is the product of a dedicated team of clinicians and scientists working together to advance the field of clinical gait analysis. It is a large study with high quality data from a well-known and respected center. The authors’ aim was ‘to investigate the relationships between age, prior surgery, GMFCS (Gross Motor Function Classification System) level, and the prevalence of gait abnormalities in a large group of patients with cerebral palsy (CP), including children with both unilateral and bilateral CP functioning in GMFCS levels I to IV’. One-thousand and five patients were included in the study (282 at GMFCS level I, 320 at level II, 289 at level III, and 114 patients at level IV). Some studies are limited in their generalizability by restrictive inclusion criteria. This study represents a comprehensive review of a broad spectrum of ages and severities of involvement. Therefore the findings of this study are generalizable, although the authors appropriately note that this is a select group of patients who are being evaluated for potential gait improvement surgery. Earlier work from this center is improved upon by stratifying patients by GMFCS level. The current study differs from an earlier one by ~ Ounpuu et al. in that the sample size of the current study is more than three times greater, participants in GMFCS level IV are included, and both unilaterally and bilaterally involved children are included. Because some patients had prior surgical treatment, further insight into iatrogenic risk factors for the development of gait abnormalities is gained. Gait deviations were grouped according to their association with equinus and intoeing, or crouch and out-toeing. Other deviations not thought to be associated with these particular gait problem groupings were also assessed. It may be surprising to readers that the paper by Rethlefsen et al. points out that age is not a predictor of the presence or absence of crouch. Sometimes surprising findings of this nature that are contradictory to conventional wisdom lead readers to doubt the validity of the study. However, this finding is consistent with our own internal (unpublished) reviews of the database at Gillette Children’s Specialty Healthcare. While crouch severity may worsen with age (unclear yet at this point), presence or absence does not. Crouch gait is prevalent at younger ages than commonly perceived. The clinical misconception that it develops at the time of the adolescent growth spurt may be that milder crouch gait is not severe enough to be apparent to clinicians. These authors offer two very important recommendations of caution that can guide clinicians in making better, safer recommendations for their patients. The odds of having deviations associated with equinus and in-toeing decreased and the odds of having gait problems associated with crouch and out-toeing increased with age, when prior surgery had been done, and with increasing GMFCS level. The authors also caution that aggressive treatments for equinus should be avoided early in life if possible, particularly in patients at GMFCS levels III and IV. Treatment for intoeing at young ages should also be prescribed conservatively. Understanding that these problems tend to decrease naturally with age, clinicians can avoid iatrogenic problems and unnecessary treatments. As ~ Ounpuu pointed out in a commentary in this journal: ‘Motion analysis has allowed a better understanding of treatment indications in terms of both impairment at the joint level and related gait function as documented by joint kinematics and kinetics.’ One focus of the paper by Rethlefsen et al. is to help clinicians have more informed discussions with patients and families based on the knowledge of the patterns of gait abnormalities according to GMFCS level. By doing so, as always, the hope is that this will help them to focus their care to maximize potential outcome and minimize risk.