title: Efficacy of bracing versus observation in the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis.
abstract: METHODS
  Systematic review.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  (1) Does brace treatment compared with observation of curves lead to lower rates of surgery and failure for patients with idiopathic scoliosis? (2) Does brace treatment compared with observation of curves lead to better quality of life outcomes for patients with idiopathic scoliosis? (3) Does brace treatment compared with observation of curves lead to improved curve angle for patients with idiopathic scoliosis?
  
  
  METHODS
  A systematic review of the English-language literature was undertaken for articles published between 1970 and December 2010. Electronic databases and reference lists of key articles were searched to identify studies comparing brace treatment with observation of curves in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Two independent reviewers assessed the strength of evidence using the GRADE criteria assessing quality, quantity, and consistency of results. Disagreements were resolved by consensus.
  
  
  RESULTS
  We identified eight studies meeting our inclusion criteria. The pooled studies comparing surgical rates between observation and brace treatment showed no statistical significance (P = .65). One study showed a statistically significant difference in failure rate between observation (45%) and brace (15%) treatment (P < .001). Findings with respect to posttreatment quality of life at 2 years were inconsistent. Two studies favored the brace group, and one the observation group using the SRS-22 and Quality of Life Profile for Spine Deformities (QLPSD) measures. Two of three studies reporting pretreatment and posttreatment curve angles demonstrated a treatment effect favoring bracing; however, statistical significance for these treatment effects could not be calculated. One study described a treatment effect favoring observation but the differences were not statistically significant (P = .26).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This systematic review identified and summarized only the highest level of evidence by limiting to comparison studies. Case-series were not included. This allowed for comparisons among the same patient populations. Findings with respect to surgical rates, quality of life, and change in curve angle demonstrate either no significant differences or inconsistent findings favoring one treatment or the other. If bracing does not cause a positive treatment effect, then its rejection will lead to significant savings for healthcare providers and purchasers. Given the very low to low level of evidence and inconsistent findings, a randomized trial is necessary to determine if bracing should be recommended.
authors: Southampton University Hospitals Trust, Southampton, UK.
authors: Evan
authors: E
authors: Davies
authors: Daniel
authors: D
authors: Norvell
authors: Jeffrey
authors: J
authors: Hermsmeyer
references: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997 May;79(5):664-74
references: 9160938
references: Spine J. 2004 May-Jun;4(3):254-60
references: 15125845
references: J Pediatr Orthop. 1995 Mar-Apr;15(2):176-81
references: 7745089
references: Lancet. 2008 May 3;371(9623):1527-37
references: 18456103
references: Phys Ther. 2005 Dec;85(12):1329-39
references: 16305271
references: J Pediatr Orthop. 2011 Jan-Feb;31(1 Suppl):S53-60
references: 21173620
references: Ann Readapt Med Phys. 2008 Jan;51(1):3-8, 9-15
references: 18093679
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Sep 15;32(20):2198-207
references: 17873811
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Jun 1;35(13):1285-93
references: 20461027
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988 Oct;13(10):1087-90
references: 3206264
references: Int Orthop. 2007 Aug;31(4):507-11
references: 16896864
references: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995 Jun;77(6):815-22
references: 7782353
references: Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2008 Jun;44(2):177-93
references: 18418338
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Oct 15;34(22):2450-7
references: 19829260