Search

Purpose: To determine consensus among Asia-Pacific surgeons regarding nonoperative management for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS)., Methods: An online REDCap questionnaire was circulated to surgeons in the Asia-Pacific region during the period of July 2019 to September 2019 to inquire about various components of nonoperative treatment for AIS. Aspects under study included access to screening, when MRIs were obtained, quality-of-life assessments used, role of scoliosis-specific exercises, bracing criteria, type of brace used, maturity parameters used, brace wear regimen, follow-up criteria, and how braces were weaned. Comparisons were made between middle-high income and low-income countries, and experience with nonoperative treatment., Results: A total of 103 responses were collected. About half (52.4%) of the responders had scoliosis screening programs and were particularly situated in middle-high income countries. Up to 34% obtained MRIs for all cases, while most would obtain MRIs for neurological problems. The brace criteria were highly variable and was usually based on menarche status (74.7%), age (59%), and Risser staging (92.8%). Up to 52.4% of surgeons elected to brace patients with large curves before offering surgery. Only 28% of responders utilized CAD-CAM techniques for brace fabrication and most (76.8%) still utilized negative molds. There were no standardized criteria for brace weaning., Conclusion: There are highly variable practices related to nonoperative treatment for AIS and may be related to availability of resources in certain countries. Relative consensus was achieved for when MRI should be obtained and an acceptable brace compliance should be more than 16 hours a day.

Objective: To collect information for the purpose of establishing starting points and possibilities for a cost-effectiveness analysis of screening for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS)., Design: Interviews, literature review, questionnaires, an estimation of costs and discussions with experts and involved parties., Method: Following an initial interview with 16 orthopaedic surgeons and school doctors a literature study into the efficacy of treatment was carried out regarding the years 1989-1999. The variation in current practice was delineated by means of a questionnaire sent to all 51 municipal health services in the Netherlands. The costs of screening and treatment were estimated on the basis of health insurance premiums and a municipal health service cost model. All of the results were presented to five methodological experts and finally the study results and the recommendations of the five methodological experts were evaluated during a meeting of persons especially invited for this purpose., Results: Screening for AIS was established to realise early diagnosis and treatment with a brace, so as to reduce unsatisfactory cosmetic outcomes and the need for surgery. Screening was performed using the bending test and was performed in 40/48 (83%) of the participating municipal health services. The overall costs of screening and treatment amount to 6 million euros per year. There was no convincing evidence that the screening programme was sufficiently sensitive and bracing sufficiently effective. Neither was there proof of the opposite. The following was recommended: obtain reliable data by carrying out a randomised controlled trial on the effectiveness of treating AIS with bracing in an early stage; carry out a case-control study combined with a retrospective patient follow-up study to evaluate the current screening practice; draw up a national standard for the screening of postural disorders in youth healthcare to ensure effective practice.

Sixty-six skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis were treated with a Prenyl brace and their results were analyzed. Fifty-three patients (80%) showed a satisfactory response. The best results were obtained in patients with lumbar curves and thoracolumbar curves less than 40 degrees. Advantages of this brace are simplicity of fabrication and fitting, patient comfort, patient acceptance and relatively low cost. The disadvantages of this brace are that it is less effective in thoracic curves in the upper thoracic spine, double major curves and kyphosis. It probably causes more significant chest restriction than the Milwaukee brace.