Aim: The aim with this study is to compare different orthotic solutions for pediatric patients with congenital talipes equnivarus.  Method: A search in the databases MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed and Scopus were made, and studies was included after the predefined criteria. The included studies were reviewed for risk of bias and validity, relevant data was extract and analyzed with regards to the research question.  Result: The result was presented on 15 different orthotic interventions in 21 different articles. The reported outcome measures were compliance, recurrence of deformity, Pirani- and Dimeglio score, range of motion and functional outcomes.  Conclusion: Based on the results a recommendation cannot be made on what orthosis that gives the best result. Future research should focus on developing and designing an orthosis that satisfies the patient's needs. / Syfte: Syftet med detta arbete är att undersöka olika ortos-lösningar med dess inkluderade resultat för patienter med kongenital idiopatisk klumpfot. Metod: En systematisk sökning i databaserna MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed and Scopus genomfördes och väsentliga studier inkluderades utefter de förbestämda kriterierna. Inkluderade studiers validitet och möjliga partiskhet bedömdes samt att relevant data utifrån frågeställningen analyserades och besvarades.  Resultat: Resultatet presenterade 15 olika typer av ortoser, i 21 olika artiklar. De presenterade utfallsmåtten var inom komplians, återfall av deformationen, Pirani- och Dimeglio poäng, rörelseomfång samt inom funktionellt resultat. Slutsats: Baserat på resultat går det inte att presentera en övervägande slutsats om vilken ortos-lösning som ger bäst resultat. Framtida forskning måste utveckla och framställa ortoser som tillfredsställer och möter patienternas behov.

Aim: Through this review we aim to investigate if there is an alternative orthotic treatment for paediatric patients with idiopathic congenital talipes equinovarus showing the same maintenance of correction as the benchmark treatment but with higher adherence. Methods: A literature search was performed in the data bases MEDLINE, CINAHL and Scopus. Predetermined eligibility criteria were used to include and exclude articles. Critical appraisal was performed for the included articles. Relevant data was extracted, analyzed and presented to aid in answering the research question. Results: Of the 204 articles found in databases, seven were included in the final review. Adherence rate and relapse rate was extracted from the seven orthotic interventions. Most of the orthoses presented both better adherence and maintenance of correction than the benchmark treatment. The majority were case series, not including a comparison group and with short-term follow-up. Conclusion: The results indicate that there are orthotic designs that may be preferred over the traditional Denis Browne bar. However, the lack of high-quality evidence and standardization to detect and define a relapse and measure adherence makes it difficult to recommend an alternative orthosis with the present evidence. Factors other than the orthotic design also influence the adherence.