The preliminary results of physiotherapy scoliosis-specific exercises on spine joint position sense in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: A randomized controlled trial

Effectiveness of Physiotherapeutic Scoliosis-Specific Exercises on 3-Dimensional Spinal Deformities in Patients With Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE) on coronal, horizontal, and sagittal deformities of the spine in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) as well as how curve severity, intervention duration, and intervention type could modify these effects.

DATA SOURCES

Data sources included PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases, which were searched from their inception to September 5, 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Clinical controlled trials reporting the effects of PSSE on the Cobb angle, angle of trunk rotation (ATR), thoracic kyphosis (TK), or lumbar lordosis in patients with AIS aged 10-18 years. The experimental groups received PSSE; the control groups received standard care (observation or bracing) or conventional exercise such as core stabilization exercise, Pilates, proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation, and other nonspecific exercises.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two researchers independently extracted key information from eligible studies. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook version 5.1.0 risk of bias assessment and the JBI Center for Evidence-Based Health Care (2016) of quasi-experimental research authenticity assessment tool. The level and certainty of evidence were rated according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The protocol for this study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023404996).

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twelve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 non-RCTs were meta-analyzed separately. The results indicated that compared with other nonsurgical management, PSSE significantly improved the Cobb angle, ATR, and TK, whereas the lumbar lordosis improvement was not statistically significant. Additionally, the efficacy of PSSE on Cobb angle was not significant in patients with curve severity ≥30° compared with controls. Nevertheless, the pooled effect of PSSE on Cobb angle was not significantly modified by intervention duration and intervention type and that on ATR was not significantly modified by intervention duration. The overall quality of evidence according to Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was moderate to low for RCT and very low for non-RCT.

CONCLUSIONS

PSSE exhibited positive benefits on the Cobb angle, ATR, and TK in patients with AIS compared with other nonsurgical therapies. In addition, the effectiveness of PSSE may be independent of intervention duration and intervention type but may be influenced by the initial Cobb angle. However, more RCTs are needed in the future to validate the efficacy of PSSE in moderate AIS with a mean Cobb angle ≥30°. Current evidence is limited by inconsistent control group interventions and small sample size of the studies.

The impact of patient scoliosis-specific exercises for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with subgroup analysis using observational studies

PURPOSE

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common pediatric spinal deformity frequently treated with patient scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE). The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and sensitivity analysis of observational studies to determine the impact of PSSE on outcomes for AIS.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis on impact of PSSE for patients with AIS was performed. Databases used included PubMed, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and ScienceDirect database inception to October 2022. Inclusion criteria included use of PSSE, patient population of AIS, and full text.

RESULTS

A total of 26 articles out of 628 initial retrieved met final inclusion criteria (10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 16 observational studies). Total included patients (n = 2083) had a frequency weighted mean age of 13.2 ± 0.9 years and a frequency weighted mean follow-up of 14.5 ± 20.0 months. Based on only data from RCTs with direct comparison groups (n = 7 articles), there was a statistically significant but clinically insignificant improvement in Cobb angle of 2.5 degrees in the PSSE group (n = 152) as compared to the control group (n = 148; p = 0.017). There was no statistically significant improvement in Cobb angle when stratified by small curve (< 30 degrees) or large curve (> 30 degrees) with PSSE (p = 0.140 and p = 0.142, respectively). There was no statistically significant improvement in ATR (p = 0.326) or SRS-22 score (p = 0.370).

CONCLUSION

PSSE may not provide any clinically significant improvements in Cobb angle, ATR, or SRS-22 scores in patients with AIS. PSSE did not significantly improve Cobb angle when stratified by curve size.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Therapeutic exercises for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents

BACKGROUND

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a pathology that changes the three-dimensional shape of the spine and trunk. While AIS can progress during growth and cause cosmetic issues, it is usually asymptomatic. However, a final spinal curvature above the critical threshold of 30° increases the risk of health problems and curve progression in adulthood. The use of therapeutic exercises (TEs) to reduce the progression of AIS and delay or avoid other, more invasive treatments is still controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of TE, including generic therapeutic exercises (GTE) and physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE) in treating AIS, compared to no treatment, other non-surgical treatments, or between treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, and two clinical trials registers to 17 November 2022. We also screened reference lists of articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing TE with no treatment, other non-surgical treatments (braces, electrical stimulation, manual therapy), and different types of exercises. In the previous version of the review, we also included observational studies. We did not include observational studies in this update since we found sufficient RCTs to address our study aims.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodology. Our major outcomes were progression of scoliosis (measured by Cobb angle, trunk rotation, progression, bracing, surgery), cosmetic issues (measured by surface measurements and perception), and quality of life (QoL). Our minor outcomes were back pain, mental health, and adverse effects.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 13 RCTs (583 participants). The percentage of females ranged from 50% to 100%; mean age ranged from 12 to 15 years. Studies included participants with Cobb angles from low to severe. We judged 61% of the studies at low risk for random sequence generation and 46% at low risk for allocation concealment. None of the studies could blind participants and personnel. We judged the subjective outcomes at high risk of performance and detection bias, and the objective outcomes at high risk of detection bias in six studies and at low risk of bias in the other six studies. One study did not assess any objective outcomes. Comparing TE versus no treatment, we are very uncertain whether TE reduces the Cobb angle (mean difference (MD) -3.6°, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.6 to -1.7; 2 studies, 52 participants). Low-certainty evidence indicates PSSE makes little or no difference in the angle of trunk rotation (ATR) (MD -0.8°, 95% CI -3.8 to 2.1; 1 study, 45 participants), may reduce the waist asymmetry slightly (MD -0.5 cm, 95% CI -0.8 to -0.3; 1 study, 45 participants), and may result in little to no difference in the score of cosmetic issues measured by the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) General (MD 0.7 points, 95% CI -0.1 to 1.4; 1 study, 16 participants). PSSE may result in little to no difference in self-image measured by the Scoliosis Research Society - 22 Patient Questionnaire (SRS-22) (MD 0.3 points, 95% CI -0.3 to 0.9; 1 study, 16 participants) and improve QoL slightly measured by SRS-22 Total score (MD 0.3 points, 95% CI 0.1 to 0.4; 2 studies, 61 participants). Only Cobb angle results were clinically meaningful. Comparing PSSE plus bracing versus bracing, low-certainty evidence indicates PSSE plus bracing may reduce Cobb angle (-2.2°, 95% CI -3.8 to -0.7; 2 studies, 84 participants). Comparing GTE plus other non-surgical interventions versus other non-surgical interventions, low-certainty evidence indicates GTE plus other non-surgical interventions may reduce Cobb angle (MD -8.0°, 95% CI -11.5 to -4.5; 1 study, 80 participants). We are uncertain whether PSSE plus other non-surgical interventions versus other non-surgical interventions reduces Cobb angle (MD -7.8°, 95% CI -12.5 to -3.1; 1 study, 18 participants) and ATR (MD -8.0°, 95% CI -12.7 to -3.3; 1 study, 18 participants). PSSE plus bracing versus bracing alone may make little to no difference in subjective measurement of cosmetic issues as measured by SAQ General (-0.2 points, 95% CI -0.9 to 0.5; 1 study, 34 participants), self-image score as measured by SRS-22 Self-Image (MD 0.1 points, 95% CI -0.3 to 0.5; 1 study, 34 participants), and QoL measured by SRS-22 Total score (MD 0.2 points, 95% CI -0.1 to 0.5; 1 study, 34 participants). None of these results were clinically meaningful. Comparing TE versus bracing, we are very uncertain whether PSSE allows progression of Cobb angle (MD 2.7°, 95% CI 0.3 to 5.0; 1 study, 60 participants), changes self-image measured by SRS-22 Self-Image (MD 0.1 points, 95% CI -1.0 to 1.1; 1 study, 60 participants), and QoL measured by SRS-22 Total score (MD 3.2 points, 95% CI 2.1 to 4.2; 1 study, 60 participants). None of these results were clinically meaningful. Comparing PSSE with GTE, we are uncertain whether PSSE makes little or no difference in Cobb angle (MD -3.0°, 95% CI -8.2 to 2.1; 4 studies, 192 participants; very low-certainty evidence). PSSE probably reduces ATR (clinically meaningful) (MD -3.0°, 95% CI -3.4 to -2.5; 2 studies, 138 participants). We are uncertain about the effect of PSSE on QoL measured by SRS-22 Total score (MD 0.26 points, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.62; 3 studies, 168 participants) and on self-image measured by SRS-22 Self-Image and Walter Reed Visual Assessment Scale (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.77, 95% CI -0.61 to 2.14; 3 studies, 168 participants). Further, low-certainty evidence indicates that 38/100 people receiving GTE may progress more than 5° Cobb versus 7/100 receiving PSSE (risk ratio (RR) 0.19, 95% CI -0.67 to 0.52; 1 study, 110 participants). None of the included studies assessed adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on the efficacy of TE is currently sparse due to heterogeneity, small sample size, and many different comparisons. We found only one study following participants to the end of growth showing the efficacy of PSSE over TE. This result was weakened by adding studies with short-term results and unclear preparation of treating physiotherapists. More RCTs are needed to strengthen the current evidence and study other highly clinically relevant outcomes such as QoL, psychological and cosmetic issues, and back pain.

The Effect of Schroth Method on Postural Control and Balance in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Literature Review

The objective of this review was to offer new information on the effectiveness of Schroth method on postural control and balance in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). PubMed, EBSCO, and Google Scholar databases were searched from June 2022 to August 2022 for prospective controlled trials and randomized controlled trials related to effects of Schroth exercises on postural control and balance in patients with AIS. The key words AIS, Schroth, balance, postural control, and proprioception were used. Studies written in English language, in the last decade were included. Seven studies were included in the review, with a total of 244 study subjects. Three studies investigated the effectiveness of Schroth exercises on balance and postural control. Two studies included investigated the effectiveness of Schroth method in combination with additional treatments of bracing and hippotherapy, while two other studies investigated effectiveness of Schroth when compared with Pilates and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF). The treatment duration varied from a week to 6 months. From the findings of this review, it is supported that Schroth method can have positive effects on balance and postural control in AIS patients. Further investigation is necessary.