Spinal Deformities and Advancement in Corrective Orthoses

Ali, Athar; Fontanari, V.; Fontana, Marco; Schmölz, Werner

doi:10.3390/bioengineering8010002

Cited by 21 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 77 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These evolutions complement a better understanding of the importance of a treating team surrounding the patient, including a physician, an orthotist, and a physiotherapist [33]. Progress in bracing includes monitors [9], CAD/CAM technologies, and three-dimensional printing [34]. Also, imaging has changed with the EOS system [35], and ultrasound technology is probably opening a new era in conservative treatment [36].…”

Section: Rigiditymentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose 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. Methods 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. Results 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. Conclusion 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.

show abstract

Section: Rigiditymentioning

confidence: 99%

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

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Outside the emergency room and cases of acute trauma, spinal bracing is primarily utilized in managing and correcting spinal deformities [ 56 ]. Common causes of spinal deformity include scoliosis and hyperkyphosis.…”

Section: Beyond the Er—spinal Bracing For Spinal Deformitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) is the treatment of choice to halt and reverse scoliosis progression [ 66 , 70 ]. This subset of spinal braces most commonly includes Boston, Charleston, Providence, and SpineCor braces [ 56 , 59 ]. Braces differ in being rigid or soft, depending on what materials are used.…”

Section: Spinal Deformity—scoliosismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The future for spinal bracing lies in enhancing brace comfort and treatment efficacy through personalized bracing. Personalized bracing comes in many forms such as enhancing existing braces through actuators and bands [ 56 ]. Actuators are ridged articulations that constantly change the form of the brace while bands hold the brace together with reasonable flexibility; both of which are used to create dynamic braces that morph with the wearer’s body.…”

Section: The Future Of Bracingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The experimental active soft brace is a combination of elastic bands and actuators that claims to correct thoracic cobb angle by 15.96 degrees, producing the desired long-term correction [ 138 ]. Band braces aim to be a more comfortable alternative to rigid braces and are more ergonomic on the body by preventing muscle atrophy [ 56 ]. Examples of soft-band braces include SpineCor, SpinealiteTM, and the TriaC brace [ 56 ].…”

Section: The Future Of Bracingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Spine Bracing: When to Utilize—A Narrative Review

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spinal bracing is a common non-surgical technique that allows clinicians to prevent and correct malformations or injuries of a patient’s spinal column. This review will explore the current standards of practice on spinal brace utilization. Specifically, it will highlight bracing usage in traumatic injuries, pregnancy, pediatrics, osteoporosis, and hyperkyphosis; address radiological findings concurrent with brace usage; and provide an overview of the braces currently available and advancements in the field. In doing so, we aim to improve clinicians’ understanding and knowledge of bracing in common spinal pathologies to promote their appropriate use and improve patient outcomes.

show abstract

Biomechanical significance of intervertebral discs on growthplate stresses in scoliotic trunks following unilateral muscle weakening: A hybrid approach of finite element and musculoskeletal modeling

Kamal

2024

Numer Methods Biomed Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to ascertain the relevance of intervertebral discs (IVD) in the stress distribution on growthplates (GPs) of a trunk model with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) following a unilateral weakening of muscles. A thoracolumbar spine finite element (FE) model of a young female healthy and an AIS spine comprising GPs linked to the T12 through sacrum vertebrae. Two scenarios of including (FEI) and excluding (FEE) IVDs were considered. Then, using optimization‐driven musculoskeletal models of the AIS and healthy trunks, the FE models were examined under subject‐specific muscle forces and gravity loads. Results of this study demonstrate that when IVDs included in the FE model, an increase, ranging from 0.2 to 1.7 MPa, with the highest value occurring at the apex of the AIS model, in the von Mises stresses in the GPs. The ratio of 1.5 was found for the maximum von‐Mises stress value on the most tilted GP in the FEI over the FEE model. Unilateral paralysis of muscles caused a reduction of 50% and 63% in the von Mises stress ratio of the concave‐over‐convex side of the most tilted GP in the FEI and FEE models of the AIS spine with healthy muscles, respectively. The intradiscal pressures, found for FEE and FEI models, assented to recent in‐vivo investigations. Nonetheless, employing IVDs in the simulations provides an indispensable tool to anticipate the effects of neuromuscular disorders on GP stresses in an AIS spine and predict deformity progression during growth.

show abstract

Spinal Deformities and Advancement in Corrective Orthoses

Cited by 21 publications

References 77 publications

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

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

Spine Bracing: When to Utilize—A Narrative Review

Biomechanical significance of intervertebral discs on growthplate stresses in scoliotic trunks following unilateral muscle weakening: A hybrid approach of finite element and musculoskeletal modeling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About