Effect of Brace Treatment on Craniovertebral to Lumbopelvic Sagittal Parameters in Adolescents with Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study was carried out systematically by conducting a review of the literature. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the literature to determine the effects of brace wearing on sagittal parameters in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). In this study, PubMed/MEDLINE (National Library of Medicine), Scopus, Ovid, CINAHL, PEDro, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library were accessed and searched using the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome, and study design model. We included studies that looked at the effects of brace treatment on sagittal spinopelvic parameters in AIS patients over the age of 18. The studies were chosen for their cross-sectional, retrospective, or prospective observational designs, and they were published in English. Review articles, case reports, case study designs, and conference abstracts were excluded from consideration. The methodological quality of the remaining articles was assessed using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. A total of 12 studies were chosen, and 995 participants were evaluated, with 3 (25%) and 9 (75%) having high and moderate quality, respectively. The studies were classified based on the length of follow-up. Long-term, short-term, and immediate effects of brace wearing on sagittal spinopelvic parameters were reported in four, five, and three studies, respectively. The results of nine studies showed a significant decrease in Cobb angle after wearing the brace, which contradicted the findings of the other two. The cervical and sagittal pelvic parameters, thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), spinopelvic parameters, and sagittal balance were all evaluated in the intended studies, yielding varying results. According to the available literature, wearing a brace flattens the TK and LL. According to this systematic review, brace treatment may affect sagittal spinopelvic parameters in adolescents with AIS, particularly in TK and LL. The cervical and pelvic parameters yielded inconclusive results. This study backs up the idea that brace design and structure can influence sagittal parameter changes. The limitations of this study include different methods of parameter measurement, variations in the brace types and wear time, varying follow-up duration, and differences in participant characteristics.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".