Comparative Study of the Treatment Outcomes of Osteoporotic Compression Fractures without Neurologic Injury Using a Rigid Brace, a Soft Brace, and No Brace

Kim, Ho-Joong; Yi, Je Min; Cho, Hyeon Guk; Chang, Bong Soon; Lee, Choon-Ki; Kim, Jeehyoung; Yeom, Jin Sup

doi:10.2106/jbjs.n.00187

Cited by 102 publications

(85 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eventually, 10 articles were included in this study (10111213141516171819) and 4 RCTs, with 281 participants, were included in meta-analysis (10111214) (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As summarized in Table 1 and 2, 6 RCTs (101112131415), 1 non-randomized controlled trial (19) and 3 observational studies (161718) were included. Characteristics of studies varied a lot but all had limited number of participants and only one trial had a sample size merely above 100 (12).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Phase of fracture and recruiting sources of participants were different between studies. Participants had acute fractures in 3 trials (101418) while those from another 3 trials had sub-acute fractures (111213). Most of the studies recruited participants in hospital environment (10131415171819), while two trials recruited in community environment (1112).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three of the 4 RCTs were included in the meta-analysis (101112) (Table 1), while Dionyssiotis et al's study (13) was excluded due to their insufficiently reported data. Efficacy of rigid brace was investigated in 2 observational studies (1718) and 2 controlled trials (1419), one of which evaluated the efficacy of thoracolumbar sacral orthosis (TLSO) was included in meta-analysis (14) (Table 1). Implementation and follow-up periods ranged from 1 to 6 months in most studies, except one case series study that immediately measured effect of the Knight-Taylor brace after it was implemented (17).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Risk of detection bias was evaluated separately in different outcomes, and only the measurement of the kyphosis angle was rated as low risk. Risk of attribution bias was rated as low in 4 trials (11121415). Risk of reporting bias was rated as unclear in half of the trials (111213).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Effect of Brace to Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: a Meta-Analysis

Jin

Lee

2016

J Korean Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brace is one of the most commonly used interventions to manage osteoporotic vertebral fracture. However, its authentic effectiveness remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of brace in patients with osteoporotic vertebral fractures. We conducted a literature review and meta-analysis following the guideline and handbook of the Cochrane collaboration. Ten published articles were included in this study and data from 4 randomized controlled trials were analyzed. Low quality evidence proved using Spinomed brace could bring large and significant beneficial effect to patients with sub-acute osteoporotic vertebral fractures. Very low quality evidence proved no significant difference between Spinomed orthosis, rigid brace and soft brace when they were used in patients with acute fractures. Therefore, it might be applicable to recommend middle term use of Spinomed orthosis to patients with subacute fracture. In addition, this study emphasized the need for high quality randomized controlled trials.

show abstract

“…Eventually, 10 articles were included in this study (10111213141516171819) and 4 RCTs, with 281 participants, were included in meta-analysis (10111214) (Fig. 1).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effect of Brace to Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: a Meta-Analysis

Jin

Lee

2016

J Korean Med Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Complications of Vertebroplasty and Kyphoplasty for Thoracic and Lumbar Procedures

Beall¹,

Brasuell²,

Favre³

et al. 2022

Complications of Pain‐Relieving Procedures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Efficacy and Safety of Vertebral Augmentation: A Second ASBMR Task Force Report

Ebeling

Åkesson

Bauer

et al. 2019

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vertebral augmentation is among the current standards of care to reduce pain in patients with vertebral fractures (VF), yet a lack of consensus regarding efficacy and safety of percutaneous vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty raises questions on what basis clinicians should choose one therapy over another. Given the lack of consensus in the field, the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) leadership charged this Task Force to address key questions on the efficacy and safety of vertebral augmentation and other nonpharmacological approaches for the treatment of pain after VF. This report details the findings and recommendations of this Task Force. For patients with acutely painful VF, percutaneous vertebroplasty provides no demonstrable clinically significant benefit over placebo. Results did not differ according to duration of pain. There is also insufficient evidence to support kyphoplasty over nonsurgical management, percutaneous vertebroplasty, vertebral body stenting, or KIVA®. There is limited evidence to determine the risk of incident VF or serious adverse effects (AE) related to either percutaneous vertebroplasty or kyphoplasty. No recommendation can be made about harms, but they cannot be excluded. For patients with painful VF, it is unclear whether spinal bracing improves physical function, disability, or quality of life. Exercise may improve mobility and may reduce pain and fear of falling but does not reduce falls or fractures in individuals with VF. General and intervention-specific research recommendations stress the need to reduce study bias and address methodological flaws in study design and data collection. This includes the need for larger sample sizes, inclusion of a placebo control, more data on serious AE, and more research on nonpharmacologic interventions. Routine use of vertebral augmentation is not supported by current evidence. When it is offered, patients should be fully informed about the evidence. Anti-osteoporotic medications reduce the risk of subsequent vertebral fractures by 40-70%.

show abstract

Comparative Study of the Treatment Outcomes of Osteoporotic Compression Fractures without Neurologic Injury Using a Rigid Brace, a Soft Brace, and No Brace

Abstract: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Cited by 102 publications

References 18 publications

Effect of Brace to Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: a Meta-Analysis

Effect of Brace to Osteoporotic Vertebral Fracture: a Meta-Analysis

Complications of Vertebroplasty and Kyphoplasty for Thoracic and Lumbar Procedures

The Efficacy and Safety of Vertebral Augmentation: A Second ASBMR Task Force Report

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About