Study of Patient Positioning on a Dynamic Frame for Scoliosis Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The goal of this clinical trial was to measure patient geometry on a dynamic positioning frame in various prone positions. Fourteen subjects (2 males and 12 females) were recruited from the scoliosis clinic at Ste-Justine Hospital on a volunteer basis. The subjects were AIS patients who were potential candidates for surgery. The Cobb angle, averaged 50 degrees (32 degrees-64 degrees). The mean age was 14.1 years (11-17). A Polaris system (Northern Digital inc, Canada) with 10 passive reflective markers was used to measure various indices of the patient's trunk geometry. Acquisitions were made while the unanaesthetized patient was in five different prone positions: I similar to the standard positioning on a Relton-Hall frame; II addition of a force applied to the ribcage at the apex of the curve; III application of a force at the apex of the curve in the lumbar region; IV, the shoulder pads were elevated to increase the patient's kyphosis; V adjustment of each pad and the application of thoracic and lumbar forces to obtain an optimal correction. The measurements of trunk geometry at each position were compared using position I as a base. A paired student t-test determined a significant difference between positions. When comparing position I to position II there was a significant difference and correction of the rib hump. There was also a significant change in shoulder angle that resulted in over correction. Position III had a significantly negative change in the rib hump. During position IV, there was a measurable increase in kyphosis. During the optimal correction, position V, a significant increase in spine length was observed as well as a significant correction in rib hump and shoulder angle. Patient trunk geometry can be improved by the application of different forces on a dynamic positioning frame. Caution is necessary as over correction and unintended negative effects were observed. The optimal patient position has not yet been found and future studies are directed at determining this.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".