Graf A.KUAN-WEN WUSmith P.A.Kuo K.N.Krzak J.Harris G.2020-07-012020-07-0120121060-152Xhttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-82955198452&doi=10.1097%2fBPB.0b013e32834dd239&partnerID=40&md5=78af8fc98c4b30527c4532507e44e180https://scholars.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/507497Treatment outcome has been a focus of interest in those who manage clubfeet. Because of a lack of a common evaluation protocol, it has become necessary to establish a universally recognized quantitative measurement to compare and better understand the treatment outcome. The outcome is not merely morphological and radiographic, but it should also include functional and quality-of-life measurements. In this article, we will outline the most commonly used methods of long-term evaluation for congenital clubfeet and recommend the data collection parameters that are most appropriate for a comprehensive functional analysis. This will begin with pretreatment classifications that are important in prognosticating the results. The physical examinations and plain radiographs in standing position are also two fundamental evaluations of clubfoot. Several outcome evaluations have been published in the literature and may be useful depending on the desired metrics. Gait analysis is an additional useful technical tool for analyzing the motion of the foot and ankle and its relation to the whole body function; pedobarography added to the dynamics of the evaluation. Functional quality-of-life questionnaires are increasing in popularity for measuring the total body functional status and the quality of life. ? 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.[SDGs]SDG3adult; clinical article; clubfoot; controlled study; data collection method; foot radiography; functional assessment; functional status; gait; human; medical literature; pedobarography; physical examination; priority journal; prognosis; quality of life; questionnaire; review; treatment outcome; Activities of Daily Living; Ankle Joint; Clubfoot; Foot; Gait; Humans; Outcome Assessment (Health Care); Quality of Life; Questionnaires; Range of Motion, Articular; Recovery of Function; Treatment Outcomereview10.1097/BPB.0b013e32834dd239220802982-s2.0-82955198452