Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is the most common type of scoliosis that affects children aged 10 to 18 years old, manifesting in a three dimensional spinal deformity. This study aimed to explore outcome measures used in de ning AIS treatment success. Particularly, analyzing the extent of radiographic and quality of life domains used and whether AIS treatment approaches (surgical, bracing, physiotherapy etc.) in uences outcomes used as proxies of treatment success. MethodsEMBASE and MEDLINE databases were used to conduct a systematic scoping review with 158 papers screened for data extraction. Extractable variables included: study characteristics, study participant characteristics, type of study, type of intervention approach and outcome measures. ResultsAll 158 studies measured quantitative outcomes. 61.38% of papers used radiographic outcomes whilst 38.62% of papers used quantitative quality of life outcomes to evaluate treatment success. Irrespective of treatment intervention utilized, the type of quantitative outcome measure recorded did not differ signi cantly. Moreover, of the radiographic outcome measures, the subcategory Cobb angle was predominantly used across all intervention approaches. For quantitative quality of life measures, questionnaires investigating multiple domains such as SRS were primarily used as proxies of AIS treatment success across all intervention approaches. ConclusionThis study identi ed that no articles employed qualitative measures of describing the psychosocial implications of AIS in de ning treatment success. Although quantitative measures have merit in clinical diagnoses and management, there is increasing value in using qualitative methods such as thematic analysis in guiding clinicians to develop a biopsychosocial approach for patient care.

Purpose Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is the most common type of scoliosis that affects children aged 10 to 18 years old, manifesting in a three dimensional spinal deformity. This study aimed to explore outcome measures used in defining AIS treatment success. Particularly, analyzing the extent of radiographic and quality of life domains used and whether AIS treatment approaches (surgical, bracing, physiotherapy etc.) influences outcomes used as proxies of treatment success. Methods EMBASE and MEDLINE databases were used to conduct a systematic scoping review with 158 papers screened for data extraction. Extractable variables included: study characteristics, study participant characteristics, type of study, type of intervention approach and outcome measures. Results All 158 studies measured quantitative outcomes. 61.38% of papers used radiographic outcomes whilst 38.62% of papers used quantitative quality of life outcomes to evaluate treatment success. Irrespective of treatment intervention utilized, the type of quantitative outcome measure recorded did not differ significantly. Moreover, of the radiographic outcome measures, the subcategory Cobb angle was predominantly used across all intervention approaches. For quantitative quality of life measures, questionnaires investigating multiple domains such as SRS were primarily used as proxies of AIS treatment success across all intervention approaches. Conclusion This study identified that no articles employed qualitative measures of describing the psychosocial implications of AIS in defining treatment success. Although quantitative measures have merit in clinical diagnoses and management, there is increasing value in using qualitative methods such as thematic analysis in guiding clinicians to develop a biopsychosocial approach for patient care.