A Biomechanical Study of the Charleston Brace for the Treatment of Scoliosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A biomechanical study of the Charleston brace. OBJECTIVE: To model the nighttime Charleston brace treatment and study its biomechanical action. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The Charleston brace has been proposed as an alternative to the traditional daytime thoracolumbosacral orthosis for the treatment of moderate scoliotic deformities. It is worn at night and imposes a supine side-bending to reduce the major scoliotic curve. The biomechanics of the Charleston brace is still poorly understood. METHODS: The geometry of the spine, pelvis, rib cage, and of the external trunk surface of 2 scoliotic patients were acquired using a 3-dimensional multiview radiograph reconstruction technique and surface topography. A finite element model of each patient's trunk was created. Two sets of mechanical properties (stiff and normal) of the spine were tested. For each case, the transition from standing to supine position was first simulated by modifying the direction of the gravity forces acting on the patients' spine. Supine bending was simulated by applying a lateral displacement on the first thoracic vertebra. A custom-fit Charleston brace was modeled and positioned on the patient model. Tension was applied in the straps. Efficiency of the simulated Charleston braces was studied by computing geometrical corrections and effects on the internal stresses of the spine. RESULTS: The reduction of the major scoliotic curve varied between 58% and 97% and was in the range of published clinical data. Internal compressive stresses up to 1 MPa were generated on the convex side of the major scoliotic curve and tensile stresses up to 1 MPa on its concavity. In contrast, increased compressive stresses were exerted on the concavity of the secondary curves and added tensile stresses in their convexity. CONCLUSION: This study quantified the Charleston brace's biomechanical effect, which consists in inverting the asymmetrical compressive loading in the major scoliotic curve. It also highlighted that the Charleston brace worsens the asymmetrical compressive loading in the compensatory curves. The finite element model developed could help studying different brace designs and optimizing brace efficiency.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".