The classification of scoliosis braces developed by SOSORT with SRS, ISPO, and POSNA and approved by ESPRM.

Braces Consensus Humans Orthotic Devices Scoliosis / therapy Treatment Outcome

Brace Classification Idiopathic scoliosis

Journal

European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society

ISSN: 1432-0932

Titre abrégé: Eur Spine J

Pays: Germany

ID NLM: 9301980

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
04 2022

Historique:

received: 06 01 2022

accepted: 25 01 2022

revised: 06 01 2022

pubmed: 23 2 2022

medline: 12 4 2022

entrez: 22 2 2022

Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Studies have shown that bracing is an effective treatment for patients with idiopathic scoliosis. According to the current classification, almost all braces fall in the thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) category. Consequently, the generalization of scientific results is either impossible or misleading. This study aims to produce a classification of the brace types. Four scientific societies (SOSORT, SRS, ISPO, and POSNA) invited all their members to be part of the study. Six level 1 experts developed the initial classifications. At a consensus meeting with 26 other experts and societies' officials, thematic analysis and general discussion allowed to define the classification (minimum 80% agreement). The classification was applied to the braces published in the literature and officially approved by the 4 scientific societies and by ESPRM. The classification is based on the following classificatory items: anatomy (CTLSO, TLSO, LSO), rigidity (very rigid, rigid, elastic), primary corrective plane (frontal, sagittal, transverse, frontal & sagittal, frontal & transverse, sagittal & transverse, three-dimensional), construction-valves (monocot, bivalve, multisegmented), construction-closure (dorsal, lateral, ventral), and primary action (bending, detorsion, elongation, movement, push-up, three points). The experts developed a definition for each item and were able to classify the 15 published braces into nine groups. The classification is based on the best current expertise (the lowest level of evidence). Experts recognize that this is the first edition and will change with future understanding and research. The broad application of this classification could have value for brace research, education, clinical practice, and growth in this field.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1007/s00586-022-07131-z PMID: 35190896

pubmed: 35190896

doi: 10.1007/s00586-022-07131-z

pii: 10.1007/s00586-022-07131-z

doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

Pagination

980-989

Commentaires et corrections

Type : ErratumIn

Informations de copyright

Références

Negrini S, Donzelli S, Aulisa AG, et al (2018) 2016 SOSORT guidelines: orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth. Scoliosis Spinal Disord 13:1-N.PAG. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13013-017-0145-8

Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Cheng JCY et al (2008) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Lancet 371:1527–1537. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60658-3

doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60658-3 pubmed: 18456103

Hresko MT (2013) Clinical practice. Idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents. N Engl J Med 368:834–841. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMcp1209063

doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp1209063 pubmed: 23445094

Dolan LA, Wright JG, Weinstein SL (2014) Effects of bracing in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. N Engl J Med 370:681. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1314229

doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1314229 pubmed: 24521128

Negrini S, Minozzi S, Bettany-Saltikov J, et al (2015) Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 6:CD006850. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006850.pub3

Dolan LA, Weinstein SL (2007) Surgical rates after observation and bracing for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an evidence-based review. Spine 32:S91–S100. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318134ead9

doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318134ead9 pubmed: 17728687

Malmivaara A (2015) Benchmarking controlled trial—a novel concept covering all observational effectiveness studies. Ann Med 47:332–340. https://doi.org/10.3109/07853890.2015.1027255

doi: 10.3109/07853890.2015.1027255 pubmed: 25965700

Nachemson AL, Peterson LE (1995) Effectiveness of treatment with a brace in girls who have adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A prospective, controlled study based on data from the Brace Study of the Scoliosis Research Society. J Bone Joint Surg Am 77:815–822

doi: 10.2106/00004623-199506000-00001

Donzelli S, Zaina F, Negrini S (2012) In defense of adolescents: they really do use braces for the hours prescribed, if good help is provided. Results from a prospective everyday clinic cohort using thermobrace. Scoliosis 7:12. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-7-12

Karol LA, Virostek D, Felton K, Wheeler L (2016) Effect of compliance counseling on brace use and success in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98:9–14. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.O.00359

doi: 10.2106/JBJS.O.00359 pubmed: 26738898

Zaina F, de Mauroy JC, Donzelli S, Negrini S (2015) SOSORT Award Winner 2015: a multicentre study comparing the SPoRT and ART braces effectiveness according to the SOSORT-SRS recommendations. Scoliosis 10:23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13013-015-0049-4

doi: 10.1186/s13013-015-0049-4 pubmed: 26265932 pmcid: 4532257

Gutman G, Benoit M, Joncas J et al (2016) The effectiveness of the SpineCor brace for the conservative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Comparison with the Boston brace. Spine J: Off J North Am Spine Soc 16:626–631. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2016.01.020

doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2016.01.020

Janicki JA, Poe-Kochert C, Armstrong DG, Thompson GH (2007) A comparison of the thoracolumbosacral orthoses and providence orthosis in the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: results using the new SRS inclusion and assessment criteria for bracing studies. J Pediatr Orthop 27:369–374. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bpb.0000271331.71857.9a

doi: 10.1097/01.bpb.0000271331.71857.9a pubmed: 17513954

Roye BD, Simhon ME, Matsumoto H et al (2020) Establishing consensus on the best practice guidelines for the use of bracing in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00060-1

doi: 10.1007/s43390-020-00060-1 pubmed: 33230667

Negrini S, Grivas TB, Kotwicki T et al (2009) Guidelines on “Standards of management of idiopathic scoliosis with corrective braces in everyday clinics and in clinical research”: SOSORT Consensus 2008. Scoliosis 4:2. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-4-2

doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-4-2 pubmed: 19149877 pmcid: 2651850

Rigo M, Negrini S, Weiss HR et al (2006) SOSORT consensus paper on brace action: TLSO biomechanics of correction (investigating the rationale for force vector selection). Scoliosis 1:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-1-11

doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-1-11 pubmed: 16857045 pmcid: 1553475

Negrini S, Grivas TB, Kotwicki T et al (2006) Why do we treat adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? What we want to obtain and to avoid for our patients SOSORT 2005 Consensus paper. Scoliosis 1:4. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-1-4

doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-1-4 pubmed: 16759352 pmcid: 1475888

Zaina F, De Mauroy JC, Grivas T et al (2014) Bracing for scoliosis in 2014: state of the art. Eur J Phys Rehab Med 50:93–110

Pfirrmann CW, Metzdorf A, Zanetti M et al (2001) Magnetic resonance classification of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine 26:1873–1878

doi: 10.1097/00007632-200109010-00011

Modic MT, Steinberg PM, Ross JS et al (1988) Degenerative disk disease: assessment of changes in vertebral body marrow with MR imaging. Radiology 166:193–199. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.166.1.3336678

doi: 10.1148/radiology.166.1.3336678 pubmed: 3336678

Fardon DF, Williams AL, Dohring EJ et al (2014) Lumbar disc nomenclature: version 2.0: recommendations of the combined task forces of the North American Spine Society, the American Society of Spine Radiology and the American Society of Neuroradiology. Spine J 14:2525–2545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.04.022

doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2014.04.022 pubmed: 24768732

Lenke LG, Betz RR, Clements D et al (2002) Curve prevalence of a new classification of operative adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: Does classification correlate with treatment? Spine 27:604–611

doi: 10.1097/00007632-200203150-00008

Schwab F, Ungar B, Blondel B et al (2012) Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab adult spinal deformity classification: a validation study. Spine 37:1077–1082. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31823e15e2

doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31823e15e2 pubmed: 22045006

Negrini S (2008) Approach to scoliosis changed due to causes other than evidence: patients call for conservative (rehabilitation) experts to join in team orthopedic surgeons. Disab Rehab 30:731–741. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280801889485

doi: 10.1080/09638280801889485

Negrini S, Hresko TM, O’Brien JP et al (2015) Recommendations for research studies on treatment of idiopathic scoliosis: consensus 2014 between SOSORT and SRS non-operative management committee. Scoliosis 10:8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13013-014-0025-4

doi: 10.1186/s13013-014-0025-4 pubmed: 25780381 pmcid: 4360938

Grivas TB, Bountis A, Vrasami I, Bardakos NV (2010) Brace technology thematic series: the dynamic derotation brace. Scoliosis 5:20. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-5-20

doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-5-20 pubmed: 20858270 pmcid: 2954959

Rigo M, Jelačić M (2017) Brace technology thematic series: the 3D Rigo Chêneau-type brace. Scoliosis Spinal Disord 12:10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13013-017-0114-2

doi: 10.1186/s13013-017-0114-2 pubmed: 28331907 pmcid: 5356257

Negrini S, Marchini G (2007) Efficacy of the symmetric, patient-oriented, rigid, three-dimensional, active (SPoRT) concept of bracing for scoliosis: a prospective study of the Sforzesco versus Lyon brace. Eura Medicophys 43:171–181. Discussion 183–184

de Mauroy JC, Journe A, Gagaliano F et al (2015) The new Lyon ARTbrace versus the historical Lyon brace: a prospective case series of 148 consecutive scoliosis with short time results after 1 year compared with a historical retrospective case series of 100 consecutive scoliosis; SOSORT award 2015 winner. Scoliosis 10:26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13013-015-0047-6

doi: 10.1186/s13013-015-0047-6 pubmed: 26300954 pmcid: 4545553

Negrini S, Atanasio S, Negrini F et al (2008) The Sforzesco brace can replace cast in the correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a controlled prospective cohort study. Scoliosis 3:15. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-3-15

doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-3-15 pubmed: 18976485 pmcid: 2612643

Lusini M, Donzelli S, Minnella S et al (2013) Brace treatment is effective in idiopathic scoliosis over 45°: an observational prospective cohort controlled study. Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.11.040

doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.11.040 pubmed: 24295798

Aulisa AG, Guzzanti V, Falciglia F, et al (2018) Brace treatment of idiopathic scoliosis is effective for a curve over 40 degrees, but is the evaluation of Cobb angle the only parameter for the indication of treatment? Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. https://doi.org/10.23736/S1973-9087.18.04782-2

Tavernaro M, Pellegrini A, Tessadri F, et al (2012) Team care to cure adolescents with braces (avoiding low quality of life, pain and bad compliance): a case-control retrospective study. 2011 SOSORT Award winner. Scoliosis 7:17. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-7-17

Ali A, Fontanari V, Fontana M, Schmölz W (2020) Spinal deformities and advancement in corrective orthoses. Bioengineering (Basel). https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering8010002

doi: 10.3390/bioengineering8010002 pmcid: 7759970

Dubousset J, Charpak G, Dorion I, et al (2005) [A new 2D and 3D imaging approach to musculoskeletal physiology and pathology with low-dose radiation and the standing position: the EOS system]. Bull Acad Natl Med 189:287–297. Discussion 297–300

de Reuver S, Brink RC, Lee TTY et al (2020) Cross-validation of ultrasound imaging in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06652-9

doi: 10.1007/s00586-020-06652-9 pubmed: 33156440

Aulisa AG, Mastantuoni G, Laineri M et al (2012) Brace technology thematic series: the progressive action short brace (PASB). Scoliosis 7:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-7-6

doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-7-6 pubmed: 22361349 pmcid: 3348014

Negrini S, Marchini G, Tessadri F (2011) Brace technology thematic series—the Sforzesco and Sibilla braces, and the SPoRT (symmetric, patient oriented, rigid, three-dimensional, active) concept. Scoliosis 6:8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-6-8

doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-6-8 pubmed: 21554719 pmcid: 3115908

Coillard C, Leroux MA, Zabjek KF, Rivard CH (2003) SpineCor–a non-rigid brace for the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis: post-treatment results. Eur Spine J 12:141–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-002-0467-x

doi: 10.1007/s00586-002-0467-x pubmed: 12709852

Coillard C, Circo AB, Rivard CH (2014) A prospective randomized controlled trial of the natural history of idiopathic scoliosis versus treatment with the Spinecor brace. Sosort Award 2011 Winner. Eur J Phys Rehab Med 50:479–487

Matthews M, Crawford R (2006) The use of dynamic Lycra orthosis in the treatment of scoliosis: a case study. Prosthet Orthot Int 30:174–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/03093640600794668

doi: 10.1080/03093640600794668 pubmed: 16990228

Matthews M, Blandford S, Marsden J, Freeman J (2016) The use of dynamic elastomeric fabric orthosis suits as an orthotic intervention in the management of children with neuropathic onset scoliosis: a retrospective audit of routine clinical case notes. Scoliosis Spinal Disord 11:14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13013-016-0073-z

doi: 10.1186/s13013-016-0073-z pubmed: 27299163 pmcid: 4900238